Slashdot Mirror


Universities Dispute with Red Hat over 'Fedora'

Carl Lagoze points out that a pre-existing software project is already using the Fedora name, dating back to 1998. They're unhappy with Red Hat's claim to the name, and have objected.

337 of 500 comments (clear)

  1. Pot, meet kettle. by fo0bar · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Perhaps Warren Togami should take exeption to Virginia/Cornell using the Fedora name 5 months after the (now Red Hat) Fedora project was started.

    Founded December 2002 by University of Hawaii Computer Science student Warren Togami, the previous Fedora Linux Project is an international team of volunteer software developers united for the development of high quality 3rd party RPM packages for the Red Hat Linux platform.

    1. Re:Pot, meet kettle. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Jebus, it's like the Firebird debacle all over again.

      "You stole our name"

      "No, you stole it from someone else."

      "Umm, we did? No we didn't! We didn't know about it, so it's ours - we don't care if someone had it first. You stole it from us!"

    2. Re:Pot, meet kettle. by fo0bar · · Score: 2, Informative
      Sorry, I should probably elaborate. From reading the university Fedora website, it appears that while work on the project itself was around since 1998, it wasn't actually released to the public under the Fedora name until May 2003.

      Meanwhile, Fedora Linux started in December 2002 as a collection of 3rd party RPMs

    3. Re:Pot, meet kettle. by Skjellifetti · · Score: 2, Informative

      Maybe you should re-read The Fedora(TM) Project's press release...

      There is substantial evidence for prior use of the name Fedora(TM) by the Cornell and Virginia teams starting in 1998. This includes published papers, web sites, software releases, and public presentations.

    4. Re:Pot, meet kettle. by PhilHibbs · · Score: 1

      I still think that Red Hat might not be able to defend their exclusive use of the trademark, as the Virginia/Cornell project started using the name before the trademark application.

    5. Re:Pot, meet kettle. by ahillen · · Score: 3, Informative

      From reading the university Fedora website, it appears that while work on the project itself was around since 1998, it wasn't actually released to the public under the Fedora name until May 2003.

      Hmm, I think they are only saying that they released version 1.0 to the public in May 2003. To quote their website:

      " There is substantial evidence for prior use of the name Fedora? by the Cornell and Virginia teams starting in 1998. This includes published papers, web sites, software releases, and public presentations."

      That sounds to me that even before May 2003 they had software releases, a web site etc. using this name (just no 1.0 release).

    6. Re:Pot, meet kettle. by fo0bar · · Score: 1
      Maybe you should re-read The Fedora(TM) Project's press release...
      There is substantial evidence for prior use of the name Fedora(TM) by the Cornell and Virginia teams starting in 1998. This includes published papers, web sites, software releases, and public presentations.

      Note to self: never try to first post again. Stupid fo0bar. Anyways, yeah, they've been using the Fedora name since 1998, but besides being "something on a computer", the two projects have almost nothing in common. After all, we have a RDBMS named Phoenix as well as a BIOS named Phoenix (and for a short time a browser named Phoenix). They're all computer software, right?

    7. Re:Pot, meet kettle. by Best+ID+Ever! · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They're all computer software, right?

      The problem isn't necessarily that Redhat is using Fedora -- it's that they're attempting to trademark it, and restrict others from using it.

    8. Re:Pot, meet kettle. by GMontag · · Score: 1, Funny

      The real issue is that nobody calls it GNUFedora.

    9. Re:Pot, meet kettle. by AKnightCowboy · · Score: 1
      That would be "GNU/Fedora", methinks.

      No, it's Fedora GNU/Linux. GNU/Linux is the operating system, Fedora is the distribution name. i.e. Debian GNU/Linux. I used to hate RMS for saying that shit, but it is sort of true. Without the GNU software Linux wouldn't be much of an OS.

    10. Re:Pot, meet kettle. by techno-vampire · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I've had a bit of experience with this, in a small software company I worked for about ten years ago. The company researched the name they wanted to use, found it unprotected, and trademarked it. Three months after the trademark was granted, another company objected. They'd been using the name for several years, but never bothered to protect it. At this point, the company's CEO (a lawyer) sent them a letter pointing out that as they hadn't bothered to trademark the name, they had no right to try to close the barn door after the horse was gone. As the two programs had nothing in common except the name, he was nice enough to tell them they could continue to use it as long as they didn't try to use it to compete with us. If Fedora wasn't trademarked, RedHat was completely within its rights to use it and trademark it.

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
    11. Re:Pot, meet kettle. by mbadolato · · Score: 2, Funny

      So by that logic if without Stanley tools my house couldn't have been built does that mean it should be named Stanley/My House? No..

    12. Re:Pot, meet kettle. by croddy · · Score: 1
      no. you've made the wrong analogy.

      you call it "my house" as opposed to "my concrete slab".

    13. Re:Pot, meet kettle. by GMontag · · Score: 1

      So by that logic if without Stanley tools my house couldn't have been built does that mean it should be named Stanley/My House? No.

      Nope: GNU/Stanley/RMS/Casa

    14. Re:Pot, meet kettle. by tlk+nnr · · Score: 1

      What's the moderation for "Wrong"?
      A quick check on the wayback machine shows that the name was used at least since August 2002, fo0bar corrected his initial statement, but the correction has score 2 and the wrong statement score 5.

    15. Re:Pot, meet kettle. by pyros · · Score: 1

      I think it should be referred to as the GNU/Linux Operating Environment, and the Linux Operating System.

    16. Re:Pot, meet kettle. by AngusSF · · Score: 2, Funny
      I think it should be referred to as the GNU/Linux Operating Environment, and the Linux Operating System.
      I don't think that would be a good idea. It would mean those who run that system would be LOSers.
      --
      "A gun is a tool, Marian. No better, no worse than any other tool. An axe, a shovel, or anything." Shane (1953)
    17. Re:Pot, meet kettle. by damien_kane · · Score: 1

      ...those who run that system would be LOSers

      I thought we became admins so we could avoid being a luser...

    18. Re:Pot, meet kettle. by brsmith4 · · Score: 2, Funny

      we'd just use the bsd tools instead. there. gnu/problem solved.

    19. Re:Pot, meet kettle. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      "The problem isn't necessarily that Redhat is using Fedora -- it's that they're attempting to trademark it, and restrict others from using it."

      Yep, and that's why I'm sorry as hell I "invested" in an RHCE certification or converted so many of my customers to their distro. After their recent moves regarding what will be called "RedHat", as well as this Fidora thing, and alot of other ways they've dicked those of us who WERE paying customers around, I won't be renewing my RHCE and I just found a new love in my Linux life: Suse 64.

      I know this is partially a flame and off topic, but RedHat is a cancer in Open Source. Anyone who knew me 6 months ago, would scarecely believe I would be saying this. I used to be a big time proponent. But they've become like an Open Source version of Microsoft.

      Suse so far is pretty sweet(especially when you have dual Opteron 2.2 ghz under the hood). I'm not going back. My only regret is that I switched so many to RedHat. I'll be paying for that for years to come I suspect.

      An RHCE whow won't be renewing and doesn't give a crap about Redhat anymore. Fuck them.

    20. Re:Pot, meet kettle. by metlin · · Score: 1

      Oh didn't you know? *BSD is dead dude ;-)

    21. Re:Pot, meet kettle. by LnxAddct · · Score: 1

      Actually I'm using Fedora right now and its the best distro I've used yet. I had been running Debian for at least a year and half to two years, and Fedora along with apt-get and up2date is really a damn awesome OS. I was really shocked.

      I only installed it so that I could validate all of those claims that said it was horrible, but then I refused to uninstall it. Not only does it run great, but its nice to look at too(which i know doesnt matter in the scheme of thigns but when ur trying to convince other people to use it, it is important). I mean my girlfriend prefers this over windows! She has no idea what an operating system is, yet alone linux. Its easy as hell to use, but has all the functionality and usablitly of any linux OS.

      Seriously if you haven't tried it, you should. For being truly free (Red Hat's site says that there is know way to purchase it from them) its really amazing. I had it installed, connected to the internet, and updated and "secured" in under 45 minutes, and I installed everything from all three cds. The configuration utils are great for people not familar with the command line.

      I knows its not for everyone, and I still do have a computer with Debian, and another with mandrake (I use to run suse too), but this is right up there with them, is some areas superior. I've been using linux for years, and Fedora has really impressed me. And changing from Red Hat to Suse because of Red Hat's "microsoft" like presence is the most ironic thing ever. At least red hat has some morals and gives away a version for free, unlike Suse who in a best case scenario makes you use their ftp. The ftp thing is horrible too, I had to get if off of bittorrent because Suse's system is so screwed up. Sure its clean and easy and nice to use, but if your trying to get away from Microsoft like companies go with Debian, I don't have a complaint about it.

      Also, I wont use Suse's livecd becuase its crap, if I want a live CD I'll stick with Knoppix (which is a great CD and installer for Debian:) ).Just my two cents.

    22. Re:Pot, meet kettle. by AKnightCowboy · · Score: 1
      I think it should be referred to as the GNU/Linux Operating Environment, and the Linux Operating System.

      Excellent point. There is another case of a situation like this... Sun Solaris. For example, the OS is SunOS 5.8, and the Operating Environment is Solaris 8. SunOS 5.6 was Solaris 2.6, SunOS 5.7 was Solaris 7, and so on. So, let's say GNU/Linux is the operating environment and Linux is the OS. ;-) Then take your pick and everyone will be right.

    23. Re:Pot, meet kettle. by payette · · Score: 1

      The original Fedora research team at Cornell put out software in the year 2000. This was the first reference implementation and was freely available. Evidence of this original distribution can be found in the Internet Archive at: http://web.archive.org/web/20000819130403/www.cs.c ornell.edu/cdlrg/FEDORA.html The current Cornell/Virginia team re-developed Fedora to be XML-based and web-services compliant. This is the new software that was released in May 2003.

    24. Re:Pot, meet kettle. by PhilHibbs · · Score: 2, Informative
      ...that clown who trademarked "Linux" way back
      You mean William Della Croce? Interesting one. However, if it took him 3 years from registering the trademark to attempting to enforce it, I'm not surprised he lost it.
    25. Re:Pot, meet kettle. by daddymac · · Score: 1

      So we'd call is BSD/Linux of something? That's not confusing :)

      --
      If something I said can be interpreted two ways, and one of the ways makes you sad or angry, I meant the other one.
    26. Re:Pot, meet kettle. by brsmith4 · · Score: 1

      You don't see anyone saying BSD/MacOS X do you? I dont think it will be a problem.

    27. Re:Pot, meet kettle. by daddymac · · Score: 1
      Neither do I, it was a joke. I put a smiley by it so people would know it was a joke, because I figured "It's probably not all that funny, but it's really all I got."

      --
      If something I said can be interpreted two ways, and one of the ways makes you sad or angry, I meant the other one.
  2. Heavens to murgatroid!!! by eyegor · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Did Darl McBride take over Red Hat when we weren't looking?
    "Fedora is now a trademark of Red Hat, Inc. Red Hat will defend this trademark in order to protect the integrity of The Fedora Project"
    Looks like Red Hat needs to find another name.

    --

    Don't anthropomorphize computers, they don't like it.
    1. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Or maybe they need to realize that it's okay to have a Fedora Linux project and a Fedora (something else) project. Trademarks are only valid for a limited set of things - you can't TM a word and claim domain over all uses of it.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    2. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by BJH · · Score: 1

      How about Black Hat?

    3. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by RLW · · Score: 1

      Microsoft thinks it can use the very generic word 'windows' exclusively across all computer markets and we all know a giant and benevolent company like Microsoft wouldn't do anything immoral.

    4. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by Theatetus · · Score: 5, Informative
      you can't TM a word and claim domain over all uses of it.

      Actually you can, if it's a made-up word. Now that Phillip-Morris is "Altria" or whatever, I can't go and start "Altria Lumber Concern" even though lumber isn't related to their cancer creation service.

      But, since neither party made up the word "Fedora", you may have a point. However, the "field" is generally recognized to be rather broad, for example, "software". If some company decided to call its telephony software suite "Nero Burning ROM", Ahead could still stop them even though telephony and CD recording are ostensibly different fields.

      --
      All's true that is mistrusted
    5. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by Bazzargh · · Score: 2, Informative

      Redhat already owns the trademark on fedora

      Really?

      Its a trademark, not a registered trademark. RH don't own it per se, a trademark is just your assertion that you used it first. Its the legal equivalent of "bagsies".

      -Baz

    6. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by AKAImBatman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > Microsoft thinks it can use the very generic word
      > 'windows' exclusively across all computer markets

      The amusing part is that Bill Gates' own book states that they were unable to register "Windows" because it was too generic. As a result, they were forced to register names like "Microsoft Windows", "Microsoft Windows 95", "Windows NT", etc. Technically, that means you could build an OS and call it "Bob's Windows".

      However, you might still get into trouble for intentionally trying to cause brand confusion. Microsoft would try to convince a judge that you're using the word "Windows" in your name to trick people into thinking that the OS is from Microsoft. You would probably have to build a case around the concept that "Windows" is a generic term for GUI based operating systems. Unfortunately, the only help you'd get there is "X Windows" which is not actually a brand name.

      IANAL, and this is not legal advice, blah, blah, blah.

    7. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      However, the "field" is generally recognized to be rather broad, for example, "software".

      Isn't there at least a division between application software and OS software?

      If some company decided to call its telephony software suite "Nero Burning ROM", Ahead could still stop them

      That falls into your 'made up' exemption - the telephony company could name its software Nero without any problems, but Nero Burning ROM is a coined phrase.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    8. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by deacent · · Score: 1

      Microsoft thinks it can use the very generic word 'windows' exclusively across all computer markets and we all know a giant and benevolent company like Microsoft wouldn't do anything immoral.

      Bookshelf, however, is a word that they can apparently control. Remember this one?

    9. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by BJH · · Score: 1

      And, of course, it's actually the X Window System.

    10. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by AKAImBatman · · Score: 1

      > And, of course, it's actually the X Window System.

      Or X11. :-)

    11. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by Nykon · · Score: 1

      Nope RH is now filing for an offical copyrighted trademark, but will have a hard time considering the other project had 5 years of prior use.

      --
      "It's better to be a pirate then join the Navy"
    12. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by Otter · · Score: 1
      However, the "field" is generally recognized to be rather broad, for example, "software".

      On the other hand, Apple got away with using "OS 9" despite the existence of an earlier "OS-9" on the grounds that no one could confuse an embedded product with a desktop OS.

      Realistically, it seems like there's a large gray area and the more prominent and deeper-pocketed combatant usually wins.

    13. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by tigga · · Score: 1
      Why do people always have to drag the court into these matters?

      Because RedHAT wants to restrict use of Fedora name to themselves.

    14. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by Florian+Weimer · · Score: 1

      Trademarks are only valid for a limited set of things

      Both projects are software and are therefore very similar (at least that's how the situation is interpreted over here).

    15. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by frodo+from+middle+ea · · Score: 1
      Not quite true,

      Generic terms which apply to that perticular industry can not be trademarked in that industry. And there is no such thing as bookshelf in Computer Science, not that I have heard of.It is the same reason why apple is able to trademark the word apple.

      This prevents you from branding your computer product either s/w h/w as apple, but you can invent a furniture shop and call it apple.

      --
      for the last time people, I am "frodo from middle eaRTH", not "middle eaST".
    16. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by nodwick · · Score: 4, Informative
      Or maybe they need to realize that it's okay to have a Fedora Linux project and a Fedora (something else) project.
      Actually, as I read the article, U Virginia and Cornell are objecting precisely because Red Hat is asserting that it's not ok to have a Fedora Linux and a Fedora [other software] project. From the article:
      Red Hat's assertion of trademark includes restrictive guidelines on the use of the Fedora name.
      This is understandably a concern for the "other" Fedora if Red Hat is going to make them change their name. If you check RH's Trademark Info page, they do seem to have some cause for concern that RH is going to clamp down on them:
      Except as provided herein, you may not use "Fedora" or any confusingly similar mark as a trademark for your product, or use "Fedora" in any other manner that might cause confusion in the marketplace, including in advertising, on auction sites, or on software or hardware. Any party wishing to use the Fedora(TM) mark may do so as long as they meet two conditions:

      (1) They must only use the Fedora(TM) mark in association with the original Fedora(TM) code found on the Fedora Project website (see http://fedora.redhat.com/) without modification;

      (2) If they charge a fee for the CD-ROM or other media on which they deliver the Fedora(TM) code, they warranty the media on which the Fedora(TM) code is delivered, thus ensuring that the recipient receives a usable copy.

      Emphasis added is mine. The wording of the legalese seems to imply that the next step for Red Hat is to clamp down on anyone else trying to publicize other software (or even non-software products) also named Fedora, even if it isn't related to Linux. Whether that's legally defensible is arguable, but the intent to try appears to be there.
    17. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by wfberg · · Score: 1

      you can't TM a word and claim domain over all uses of it.

      Actually you can, if it's a made-up word. Now that Phillip-Morris is "Altria" or whatever, I can't go and start "Altria Lumber Concern" even though lumber isn't related to their cancer creation service.


      No you can't. Even if it is a "well known mark" (which only really applies if you've got a lot of money to bribe, erm, employ the legal profession with), which gets some additional protection (e.g. you can't start selling "coca-cola" massage oil, even though they have no intention to enter that particular market) there are still ample exemptions.

      For example, it's perfectly alright for me, under trademark law to say "SCO are smoking crack", since I'm referring to the company that is the registrant of the SCO mark. There is no likelihood of confusion, and there's a free speech angle. Non-commercial uses are also exempt; Ford can't come after the church of concordia on the basis that they say "Fnord" a lot.
      Trademark law's basic tenet is that it is about protecting consumers; if you buy a FooBar sprocket, you'd expect it to be made by FooBar Inc., and you'd accept no substitute. But, you might be interested what other people have to say about FooBar sprockets, while on the other hand not being too concerned with 5 year olds selling FooBar lemonade by the side of the road.

      If some company decided to call its telephony software suite "Nero Burning ROM", Ahead could still stop them even though telephony and CD recording are ostensibly different fields.

      They're still both software though (the USPTO has a finite number of different fields they recognize). "Nero Burning ROM" woodburners would be another matter though - would you go shopping for CD-R burning software at woodburners.com ?

      --
      SCO employee? Check out the bounty
    18. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by jundy · · Score: 1

      Image this: Your /. identifier is ultrabot and I can guarantee that you have been on /. much longer than I since I have just started reading /. regularly in that last couple of months. However I am a rich, famous, and powerful individual (ok ... remember that we are imagining here :-)) and I want ultrabot as my identifier. Do I have the right to simply take it, make it mine and simply say: "Hey I'm bigger so it's mine"? This is acceptable in accordance with "software darwinism in action" example.

      One of the first steps to creating a Trademark is to make a search for that name which should also include the public domain. I find it hard to believe that RedHat didn't do this before "[announcing] its intent to formalize ... a trademark."

      Personally I am getting an eerie feeling that RedHat is turning into an 'open source' Microsoft.

      --

      ---
      People who say it can't be done shouldn't interupt people who are doing it. - Chinese Proverb
    19. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by RevMike · · Score: 1
      Or maybe they need to realize that it's okay to have a Fedora Linux project and a Fedora (something else) project. Trademarks are only valid for a limited set of things - you can't TM a word and claim domain over all uses of it.

      It depends one the jurisdiction. Trademark law differs from state to state and differs internationally. As a general rule of thumb in the US, trademark infringement only occurs if the use of the mark is likely to cause confusion among customers. However, I beleive that the UK has much stronger protections. That is why the "World WildLife Fund" prevailed over the "World Wrestling Federation" in the UK, and for that matter "Apple Records" vs. "Apple Computer".

    20. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by jackbox · · Score: 5, Funny

      Trademarks are only valid for a limited set of things - you can't TM a word and claim domain over all uses of it.

      That's right. Surely, anyone who successfully gained Access to trademark rights on common terms would have quite a Project ahead of them! They would need lawyers that Excel at trademark law to defend them. I doubt that any litigator could ever have the last Word on this issue; the Outlook would not be good. But a savvy legal Explorer could open a lot of Windows into to what goes on behind such strategies.

    21. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by ultrabot · · Score: 1

      Do I have the right to simply take it, make it mine and simply say: "Hey I'm bigger so it's mine"?

      Well, I wouldn't obviously sue you are make lots of noise about it. I could change my handle (probably to some permutation of Bruce Perens) and go on with my life. More probably I would no nothing, I don't care enough. The university guys should have started complaining at the point when the fedora project (the original one, not the new red hat project) was found. They should have been all over the Fedora mailing lists.

      There are just too much big things like the SCO case, SW patents and whatnot to waste energy to petty things like this.

      --
      Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
    22. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by gabe · · Score: 1

      I'd like to see you go startup the Oracle Web Browser project and see just how quickly you're nuts get roasted by their legal team.

      --
      Gabriel Ricard
    23. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by geoffspear · · Score: 1

      How about a better example. Microsoft decides they want to release an OS called "GNU/Linux." By your logic, they should have every right to do so, and anyone else using that name should come up with a different name.

      --
      Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
    24. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by Theatetus · · Score: 1
      Isn't there at least a division between application software and OS software?

      Depends on how good the lawyers involved are. The principle, at least, is that consumers should never be confused by product names; I think if you started calling your word processor "Apple OS X" you might not get very far, because frankly that would confuse consumers, even though "Apple OS X" is an operating system and you're making applications software.

      Some other post mentioned OS-9. That's a good example of another principle I forgot to mention: the more it sounds like a serial number, the less likely you are to get trademark protection (consider that Intel named its 586 the "Pentium" because USPTO said they couldn't trademark numbers).

      That falls into your 'made up' exemption - the telephony company could name its software Nero without any problems, but Nero Burning ROM is a coined phrase.

      But "Nero" is not a made up word (well, maybe Claudia made it up in 15 AD, but it's certainly a common word by now). My point was that this hypothetical "Nero Telephony Suite" probably would not survive a challenge by Ahead Software, even though a CD burning suite and a telephony suite seem far enough apart that you wouldn't confuse the two; they're both close enough as far as USPTO has often been concerned.

      --
      All's true that is mistrusted
    25. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by CaptnMArk · · Score: 1

      More recently they stole the ".net" for their marketing campain.

    26. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by ultrabot · · Score: 1

      Microsoft decides they want to release an OS called "GNU/Linux.

      We are talking at different scale here. I bet a press release by MSFT would cause quite an uproar immediately, instead of few months down the road.

      To me, it seems obvious that a bigger project gets to override an unknown project with the same name, especially if it is accidental (as this happens to be). I have several open source projects - if red hat, msft or whatever chose to release something with the same name, I would be amused, but wouldn't make much noise.

      Frankly, I care more about technology than names, and as the university project is completely unknown to me, I don't really care about their name problems. How much money are they going to lose because there is a Linux distro with the same name, as opposed to engaging in a lawsuit? Why didn't they care about fedora-the-project that is probably something like one year old?

      --
      Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
    27. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by e2d2 · · Score: 1

      Its the legal equivalent of "bagsies".

      Is that like "shotgun!" ?

    28. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by damien_kane · · Score: 1

      a savvy legal Explorer could open a lot of Windows into to what goes on behind such strategies.

      Would that lia^H^Hawyer's name be Bob by chance?

    29. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by bellings · · Score: 1
      I hope like hell RedHat does defend its trademark.

      Trademarks law, unlike copyright or patent law, protects the consumer. If I buy "Fedora Linux" I want to be certain I'm actually getting Fedora Linux, and not some third rate knockoff. I'd be awfully damned pissed if RedHat didn't even provide the first level of customer support for a product, namely "give the customer a reasonable expectation that the name on the box is truthful."

      Now, I have no idea what the assholes at Cornell are yammering about. If they seriously believe "our request to withdraw its trademark applications and reverse its claims of usage restrictions on the name" is reasonable, then it's pretty clear they haven't bothered to speak to their own legal department.

      1. dickheads with no clue and a coincidentally named webpage ran out of Pabst Blue Ribbon and cheap Ganga,
      2. dickheads wrote a jackoff letter to RedHat,
      3. information about their jackoff letter got posted on Slashdot,
      4. slashdot fills with more posts from clueless assholes living in their mother's basement,
      5. ...
      6. profit!


      --
      Slashdot is jumping the shark. I'm just driving the boat.
    30. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by Kombat · · Score: 1

      You're confused. The original poster was saying you can claim ownership of a trademark, if it is a made-up word, and he's right. You supported his argument, by correctly pointing out that you cannot create and market "Coca-Cola Massage oil" - because "Coca-Cola" is a made-up word, created by the Coca-Cola company. It is a made up word, thus, they can claim ownership of it. That's what the original guy said.

      However, if a word is not made-up, they cannot claim ownership of it. You again chose a perfect example, by saying that Ford Motor Company cannot come after a church using the word "Fnord." Indeed, it goes beyond that, in that Ford Motor Company couldn't even object if the church used the word "Ford" (spelled correctly), or even if another company came into being and started using the name "Ford." Because "Ford" is not a made-up word - it is a real name.

      For example, see the Ford Modeling Agency. No legal battles there, because FoMoCo doesn't have a legal leg to stand on in demanding that they stop using the name "Ford."

      --
      Like woodworking? Build your own picture frames.
    31. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by wfberg · · Score: 1

      You're confused. The original poster was saying you can claim ownership of a trademark, if it is a made-up word, and he's right.

      You cannot, and I quote "claim domain over all uses of it." "Actually you can."

      You can't make a trademark out of a generic/descriptive term (MouseTrap(R)! It traps mice!), but even if you succeeded in registring it, you still have no claim to all uses of it - there is a host of "exceptions" (or rather, non-infringing uses that cannot be prohibited - rights they don't have); not in the least non-commercial or non-confusing uses and free speech. And no, when you register a trademark you can't just register it in all categories.

      For example, see the Ford Modeling Agency. No legal battles there, because FoMoCo doesn't have a legal leg to stand on in demanding that they stop using the name "Ford."

      Actually, even though Ford is a common surname, Ford qualifies as a "famous mark", so yes, had FoMoCo acted in time, they could have stopped this "dilution" from happening. Disney is also "just a name", but the Disney Golfcart Co. would have a hard time fighting off ABC lawyers, even if it's owner is called Disney.

      --
      SCO employee? Check out the bounty
    32. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by cpeterso · · Score: 2, Funny


      but is Emacs an application or an operating system?

    33. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by cpeterso · · Score: 1


      so the name "Lindows" is a trademark infringement, but the name "Red Hat Windows" would not be?

    34. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      I'd like to see you go startup the Oracle Web Browser project and see just how quickly you're nuts get roasted by their legal team.

      Well, I could start a search engine and call it Oracle, or The Oracle, or perhaps Oracle at Delphi, and be fairly safe.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    35. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by AKAImBatman · · Score: 1

      > so the name "Lindows" is a trademark infringement, but
      > the name "Red Hat Windows" would not be?

      AKAIK, no court of law has yet declared "Lindows" to be infringing. If they had, Lindows.com wouldn't work right now.

      Technically, neither of your examples are infringing. That doesn't stop Microsoft from trying to claim they infringe.

    36. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by deacent · · Score: 1

      This prevents you from branding your computer product either s/w h/w as apple, but you can invent a furniture shop and call it apple.

      Or a music company. Oh, wait... :)

    37. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by starnix · · Score: 1

      Ok, you wouldn't make much noise? Ever hear of name recognition. The Fedora project has name recognition in its own circles. For Redhat to just come in and take the name and expect them to find something else is inexcusable. I agree, Redhat IS becoming an opensource Microsoft. They are using thier money to push others around.

    38. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by Nucleon500 · · Score: 1

      Yes, Red Hat could clamp down, but that language doesn't in any way imply they will. The language is there so that you can still offer downloads or sell CDs under the Fedora name, but Microsoft can't take Fedora, implement drive letters and 8.3 filenames, and market it as Fedora, throwing more marketing power at it and killing Red Hat. The language is there so they retain some control against misuse of their trademark. I don't think it's a problem - don't confuse Red Hat and SCO.

    39. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by uglyduckling · · Score: 1

      OpenWindows (Sun)
      DECWindows (DEC)

    40. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by geoffspear · · Score: 1

      Outside of Slashdot's readership, Linux is comparatively an unknown project compared to anything Microsoft puts out. The scale doesn't matter. The principle is what matters, and you're blinded by mindless Linux advocacy.

      --
      Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
    41. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by ultrabot · · Score: 1

      The principle is what matters, and you're blinded by mindless Linux advocacy.

      So if I have a tiny project and a large project emerges with the same name, they should change the name because I was there first? I'm afraid the world doesn't work that way.

      --
      Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
    42. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by FooBarWidget · · Score: 1

      Actually even "X Windows" won't help, because "X Windows" doesn't exist. It's called "The X Windowing System", or just "X".
      "X Windows", "X-Windows", "X Window" or "X-Window" are just slangs made up by users who don't know better.

    43. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by a_n_d_e_r_s · · Score: 1

      Actually White Hat Linux has a nicer ring to it.

      --
      Just saying it like it are.
    44. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by geoffspear · · Score: 1

      They should check the name first, and yes, if they create confusion by using the same name and then use their relative size to crush you, they're breaking several US laws and just about every principle of ethics.

      --
      Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
    45. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by monkeyfinger · · Score: 1
      you can't TM a word and claim domain over all uses of it.

      True, but I dare you to start a project called Macdonald's.

    46. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by Bazzargh · · Score: 1

      apparently so

      You have to bow down before the might of the internet when it can not only tell you that "bags" and "shotgun" are playground slang for the same thing, but the relative likelihood of each one being used in different parts of New Zealand.

    47. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by AKAImBatman · · Score: 1

      I believe I said that. Please pay more attention.

    48. Re:Heavens to murgatroid!!! by bellings · · Score: 1

      Wow. Way to refute my points! You linked to a site giving the legal definition of trademarks! And nothing there contradicted anything I said!

      You're so fucking smart, it makes baby jesus cry.

      --
      Slashdot is jumping the shark. I'm just driving the boat.
  3. Oh boy... by AKAImBatman · · Score: 1

    ...here goes the FireBird scandal all over again...

  4. Name change by penguinrenegade · · Score: 3, Funny

    Then apparently Fedora needs to change hats...

    1. Re:Name change by AKAImBatman · · Score: 2, Funny

      I think they should call it "Derby Linux".

      ....

      What-da-mean, "derbies aren't as cool"?!

    2. Re:Name change by techstar25 · · Score: 1
    3. Re:Name change by Zeriel · · Score: 1

      I still have a StormLinux promotional poster (tagline: "It's time to close the Windows(tm)") in my server room, despite the fact that I don't even think it exists anymore (it had an excellent hardware detection mechanism in 2000-2001ish, and not much else as I recall.)

      --
      "America has done some terrible things. But I know that Americans don't cheer when innocents die." -Dave Barry
  5. RedHat by Moderator · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I don't see why they didn't just keep the name "RedHat Linux."

    --
    The World is Yours.
    1. Re:RedHat by AKAImBatman · · Score: 1

      > I don't see why they didn't just keep the name "RedHat Linux."

      Because they didn't want to cause brand confusion. RedHat is basically saying that RedHat Enterprise and RedHat Desktop Linux are two completely separate products, the later of which they no longer officially support. As a result, they've renamed the later to "Fedora Linux" in an attempt to keep two products separate.

    2. Re:RedHat by globalar · · Score: 1

      "Because they didn't want to cause brand confusion."

      That would be what one shareholder would tell another shareholder.

      It is all a mindshare game. What it amounts to is Redhat wants to be more seriously considered with its Enterprise line. Having only a paid line of Redhat-branded products means Redhat as name refers only to enterprise solutions, not a free/packaged desktop. The free/packaged desktop was becoming (or the leadership thought it would eventually become) more common than the Enterprise. So when clientA thinks of Redhat, he would think of a desktop, not an "Enterprise Solution." This is not so much confusion as the opposite of what the company wants the customer to think.

      As has been mentioned before, Redhat probably was not making much (if any) money off their desktop line, but their brand was very strongly tied to that line. So the solution, from someone's perspective, was to tie the successfully marketed (and recognized) brand to the product which had the most returns or possible returns on profit. While you are doing that, get the desktop development out of house where some of the best software components are created anyway - in the open source community. The open source community gets a new distro and Redhat gets a more exclusive name focused on the market which they intend to grow in. Win-Win, according to the company.

  6. New name for Redhat's product by gibbonboy · · Score: 1

    Maybe they should call theirs "lungcheese" or something. "with a name like "lungcheese", it has to run good"

    --
    "Never pet a burning dog."
    1. Re:New name for Redhat's product by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "...and we've got new jam, called..'Painful Rectal Itch'...yes, with a name like 'Painful Rectal Itch', you KNOW it has to be great..."

      Haven't heard that SNL sketch in a LONG time...

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  7. how about the hat.... by caffeinex36 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    seems www.fedora.info is using a hat that looks similar to redhats doesnt it? im sure everyone will throw stones for a while...till the glass house falls down.

    1. Re:how about the hat.... by Tenareth · · Score: 5, Informative


      A Trademark needs to be exact, It's a Fedora (Generic) and it's not red, and it's not pointing the right direction.

      Just ask Rob about the IBM Logo, IBM said that since it wasn't the proper ratio it wasn't a valid Logo. In an old job we got to co-brand with IBM, and the dimensions were defined down to the width of the spaces and blue in the lettering.

      --
      This sig is the express property of someone.
    2. Re:how about the hat.... by T-Ranger · · Score: 1

      The name of that style of hat is "Fedora". I cant see how a software company (or even a hat company) could resonably force people not to use a generic name to refer to a style of clothing.

    3. Re:how about the hat.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Maybe the hats look the same because........

      THEY ARE BOTH FUCKING FEDORAS!!!!

      Jesus H Christ people, come on!

    4. Re:how about the hat.... by scrytch · · Score: 1

      > seems www.fedora.info is using a hat that looks similar to redhats doesnt it?

      Well yeah, they're both fedoras. If they were both using bowlers or stetsons, those would probably look similar too.

      --
      I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
    5. Re:how about the hat.... by rainwater · · Score: 1

      Yeah, its real surprising that they use a hat as a logo for the Fedora project CONSIDERING A FEDORA IS A HAT!

    6. Re:how about the hat.... by zdislaw · · Score: 1

      So you are saying that I can use the IBM logo as long as I vary the space between the letters by a fraction? I'll give it a shot if you don't mind me calling you from court to come testify in my defense. Those logo specs are for marketing departments. Legal departments have an entirely eifferent set of standards to determine what is theirs and what is yours.

      --
      bad sig...no donut.
    7. Re:how about the hat.... by jliverse · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but it's an actual fedora, while Red Hat is a chapeau. IANAHE.

    8. Re:how about the hat.... by Grandmasta · · Score: 1

      What we all really need to worry about is what Indiana Jones will do when he finds out these guys are stealing his fashion statements.

  8. Amazon, etc. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Should we point out to the university that Amazon is the name of a rainforest, and that the online store should change their name?

    There are many instances where names overlap in different products, companies and places. It's just something that you have to accept and deal with in a free market economy, and especially OSS.

    1. Re:Amazon, etc. by chosen_my_foot · · Score: 1

      Only if the rainforest files suit.

    2. Re:Amazon, etc. by Perl-Pusher · · Score: 1
      I can see the confusion,

      Rain Forest -- Living Trees.
      Books -- Dead Trees!

    3. Re:Amazon, etc. by frodo+from+middle+ea · · Score: 1
      Well, Jeff for one can sue the forest too..

      And it would be super cool, a book store suing a forest.

      --
      for the last time people, I am "frodo from middle eaRTH", not "middle eaST".
    4. Re:Amazon, etc. by jliverse · · Score: 1
      That's ridiculous.
      1. The Amazon Rainforest(TM) doesn't care about people confusing it with amazon.com. One consists of millions of square kilometers of trees and wildlife and the other is a freakin' URL.
      2. Two OSS packages should not have the same name. Why don't we just rename all the OSS projects to 'Linux'. We could get a discount on bulk orders for black t-shirts.
      3. Even if they could have the same name, the wealthy and powerful one shouldn't be able to establish a legal right to exclude the use of the name from the other.
      4. Red Hat is trying to trademark the word Fedora as 'Computer software, namely, computer programs for operating systems, and instructional manuals provided therewith as a unit.'
      5. There is overwhelming evidence (Thanks, archive.org)that the Cornell Fedora(TM) group was using the name since the mid-to-late nineties.
      6. If an OSS project was to register somewhere, where would it be? Hmm -- Freshmeat? Even there, the Cornell/UVA Fedora(TM) project was added before the Red Hat project.
  9. Gentoo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Kind of like http://freshmeat.net/projects/gentoo/ and http://www.gentoo.org.

    1. Re:Gentoo by Neon+Spiral+Injector · · Score: 4, Informative

      From the bottom of the (file manager) project's home page:

      Gentoo the Linux distribution has nothing to do with gentoo the file manager, except the latter runs on the former. I actually used the name first of the two, way back in September 1998. I've been in touch with the Gentoo folks, and we're cool.

    2. Re:Gentoo by VisorGuy · · Score: 1

      And, of course, the Gentoo is a breed of penguin, so it's all good.

      --
      This user account is inactive account replaced by the PDA
    3. Re:Gentoo by gid · · Score: 1

      That always kinda annoyed me, I've run the gentoo filemanager for quite awhile, it's pretty nice sans the annoying "file list jumps to the top when selecting things sometimes" bug, that I've been unable to find out exactly how to reproduce it. Anyway, one day a friend was saying all how he's running gentoo, and I'm like me too, only to find out he was talking about this new linux distribution.

      Honestly people, how long does a google search really take? Or do people just not care? I have a project called roomjuice, I'd be rather annoyed if some big company took the name, making my small project hard to find on google all the sudden.

    4. Re:Gentoo by cerberusss · · Score: 1
      Does anyone else here find that this and every other file manager on Linux really, awfully sucks? I am looking for a full-featured filemanager, like Total Commander on Windows, using GTK2 because it must look good too. It has to have a directory pane at the left too, or at least be configurable that way. Have I said it should also be usable with just the keyboard? And use the standard Gnome icons?

      I've searched above and beyond but I couldn't find something like this. And don't come talking to me about Nautilus, because that's nothing more than a window with icons in it. Konqueror again is too full featured and I use Gnome anyway.

      In the end, nothing beats the commandline for ease-of-use.

      --
      8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
  10. XP Lasersport by GregoryD · · Score: 1

    I'm still waiting for XPLasersport to sue WindowsXP. The "Photon Experience" somehow became the "Windows Experience". Sue sue sue! Then maybe Photon could come back :)

  11. Alternate Names by Vengie · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Blue BabyBonnet Linux
    Raspberry Beret Linux
    I mean really. The attempt at "fedora" from "red hat" was cute.....but it isn't exactly necessary.....
    Pink Sunglasses Linux.....
    Green Visor Linux
    fedora is a "cute" inside joke that most people won't even get. [how many PHB's or joe-sixpacks or even college students do you really expect know what the hell a Fedora is anyway]
    -b

    --
    When in doubt, parenthesize. At the very least it will let some poor schmuck bounce on the % key in vi. (Larry Wall)
    1. Re:Alternate Names by proj_2501 · · Score: 1

      a fedora is easy. indiana jones wore one!

    2. Re:Alternate Names by AKAImBatman · · Score: 1

      fedora is a "cute" inside joke that most people won't even get. [how many PHB's or joe-sixpacks or even college students do you really expect know what the hell a Fedora is anyway]

      Plenty. I actually think that geeks would have a harder time knowing what a Fedora is than Joe Sixpack. Joe Sixpack watched all the Chicago Gangster movies growing up. Geeks watched Sci-Fi.

      Case and point: My wife (who's originally from Russia!) knew what a Fedora was when I asked her. I had to Google to figure it out.

    3. Re:Alternate Names by livewirevoodoo · · Score: 1

      The reason they named it fedora was because the logo shows a guy wearing one. The hat in question has always been a fedora, its not as if they suddenly needed to come up with a cute name for a hat. That said, who knows what the legal issues will be. Cornell Fedora vs Red Hat Fedora can both show prior usage, Cornell of the name, and Red Hat of the logo. We'll have to see what happens.

      --
      If its stupid but it works, its not stupid.
    4. Re:Alternate Names by Perl-Pusher · · Score: 1
      Geeks watched Sci-Fi.

      Yes, but didn't Capt. Kirk wear one in an episode where they went to a planet with aliens that copied the gangster flicks, ala Elliot Ness. I keep seeing that scene in the adds for the original Star Trek on the SciFi channel.

    5. Re:Alternate Names by brsmith4 · · Score: 1

      its a hat. what's the big deal? that, and its the same type of hat that's been redhat's logo since day one. go to their merchandise site. They've been selling the "RedHat Fedora" for years, produced by the New York Hat Company. where is the joke?

    6. Re:Alternate Names by AKAImBatman · · Score: 1

      It was called "A Piece of the Action". A whole planet had reorganized itself around a book on 1920's gangsters and Kirk had to set it straight.

      Yes, I remembered that off the top of my head. So sue me.

    7. Re:Alternate Names by Accord+MT · · Score: 1


      You forgot the obvious:

      Purple Helmet Linux

    8. Re:Alternate Names by JourneymanMereel · · Score: 1

      It looks to me to be more that the Univerisy simply wants to be able to keep using the Fedora name whereas RedHat wants to claim ownership of it and prevent anybody else from using it.

      http://www.fedora.info/fedora.htm

      --
      Life has many choices. Eternity has two. What's yours?
    9. Re:Alternate Names by schon · · Score: 1

      Yes, I remembered that off the top of my head. So sue me.

      But what was the name of the bosses who were played by Anthony Caruso and Vic Taybeck?

      Bela Oxmix and (Hugo?) Krako.

      And yes, I knew that off the top of my head (except Taybeck's character - I can't for the life of me remember his first name..)

    10. Re:Alternate Names by Loki_1929 · · Score: 1

      "Pink Sunglasses Linux.....
      Green Visor Linux"


      Big Johnson Linux - 'In the world of the geek, the 4-inch Johnson is king'

      --
      -- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
    11. Re:Alternate Names by Jacer · · Score: 1

      Quite a bit. I'm not sure if you're familar with the emo kids, but fedoras are really popular. As are other items, cardigans, general sweaters, blazers, ect. Usually worn with jeans.

      --
      --fetch daddy's blue fright wig, i must be handsome when i release my rage
    12. Re:Alternate Names by Xua · · Score: 1

      Fedora is a known russian/slavic female name. I think there are several thousands Fedoras living in Russia, Ukrania and Belorussia.

    13. Re:Alternate Names by default+luser · · Score: 1

      You could always call it:

      "Rubber Baby Buggy Bumper Babysitting Service" Linux.

      To appeal to the Simpsons demographic, of course!

      --

      Man is the animal that laughs.
      And occasionally whores for Karma.

    14. Re:Alternate Names by jonadab · · Score: 1

      > [how many PHB's or joe-sixpacks or even college students do you really
      > expect know what the hell a Fedora is anyway]

      Most of them. After the stocking cap and the baseball cap, it's probably the
      third most common and well-known variety of hat. Well, maybe fourth after
      the cowboy hat.

      Articles of clothing tend to be on the whole fairly well understood by most
      folks. People who have trouble with the concept that Mexico isn't one of the
      United States can nevertheless tell you what a sombrero is, no problem.
      People who don't know exactly what cargo is still know what cargo pants are.
      I think most people know what a fedora or a stetson is, too.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    15. Re:Alternate Names by r00zky · · Score: 1

      what about Feladora Linux?

      --
      I'm a chainsmokin' alcoholic sociopath, so-ci-o-path
    16. Re:Alternate Names by baileytal · · Score: 1

      Ahem. That's Vic Tayback .

      --
      Never at a loss for words... because of the voices.
    17. Re:Alternate Names by cpeterso · · Score: 1


      Red Bull Linux
      Blue Balls Linux

    18. Re:Alternate Names by forrestt · · Score: 1
      I think most people know what a fedora or a stetson is, too.

      Yeah, everyone knows what a Stetson is.

  12. In Related News... by Lazarus_Bitmap · · Score: 4, Funny

    Matt Drudge has issued an objection, as he has a program that dates back to '98; a content management tool that auto-publishes sexual innuendo the second it is uttered by obscure, unnamed sources.

    --
    -Laz .:change is inevitable -- growth is optional:.
    1. Re:In Related News... by Mr.+Firewall · · Score: 1

      Drudge doesn't stand a chance. Robert X. Cringely has been using a fedora as HIS trademark (Infoworld column) since at least the late 1980's.

      --
      In times of universal deceit, telling the truth gets you modded -1 Troll
  13. Re:Maybe Just Qualify the Name by JPelorat · · Score: 4, Funny

    Or they could call it Fez

    --
    Hokey statistics and ancient misconceptions are no match for a good thought in your head, kid!
  14. Pretty boneheaded move on Red Hat's part by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A simple Google search on "Fedora" shows the project as the third result (behind two Fedora Linux results.) If you were going to name your project something, don't you think you'd at least take the ten seconds it takes to do a Google search and make sure you're not taking an already-used name? Fedora (Flexible Extensible Digital Object Repository Architecture) is even trademarked, for crying out loud.

    Somebody at Red Hat needs their ass kicked over this, methinks.

    1. Re:Pretty boneheaded move on Red Hat's part by millette · · Score: 1

      RedFedora reminds me too much of Red Barchetta by Rush.

    2. Re:Pretty boneheaded move on Red Hat's part by VisorGuy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The last entry on the way back machine doesn't show that TM on the FEDORA Project site.

      However, it does appear that they have been using the Fedora name longer than the original Fedora Linux Project, but not longer than Red Hat has been associated with the Fedora.

      --
      This user account is inactive account replaced by the PDA
    3. Re:Pretty boneheaded move on Red Hat's part by forevermore · · Score: 3, Informative
      Fedora (Flexible Extensible Digital Object Repository Architecture) is even trademarked

      Merely adding the ™ symbol after your name doesn't really say more than "I use this name, I call it mine, and I may be in the process of registering it." Unless you have substantial documentation to back it up (which the universities do claim to have), it isn't really legally binding until you register it with the government and that little ™ turns into a nice ®. However, registering a trademark is expensive, and usually takes a long time, so most people just stick with the ™ if they have enough documentation to support the claim.

      --
      Do you really need reason for beer? Wingman Brewers
  15. mirror by millette · · Score: 1, Informative

    In case it gets slashdotted: mirror

    1. Re:mirror by millette · · Score: 1

      Ok, so it didn't get slashdotted. Good for them :) When I saw the page the first time, it was a little slow, but it picked up steam now. Anyway, my mirror is smaller and doesn't have weird ms tags in its html. It also doesn't cause tidy to segfault...

  16. File An Opposition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    If the Fedora Project objects, then they should file their own application for trademark registration and an opposition to RedHat's registration.

    1. Re:File An Opposition by jrduncans · · Score: 1

      What if they prefer to have it untrademarked, as they don't believe such a term should be able to be trademarked. Just as we (all the slashdotters opposed to software patents) don't advocate applying for your own patent as the method to show prior art.

    2. Re:File An Opposition by michael_cain · · Score: 1
      What if they prefer to have it untrademarked, as they don't believe such a term should be able to be trademarked.

      Then they're probably being logically inconsistent. If you assert that a term is too generic to be subject to trademark, then you are asserting that no one, including yourself, is entitled to exclusive use of it. If they claim that the term is too generic but that it's okay for both themselves and RedHat to use the term (which doesn't seem to be what they want), that's consistent, but given an existing trademark, will require a court case to settle the issue -- and the court may tell them that they're wrong, it's specific enough. If they maintain that they are the ones who should be entitled to the exclusive use of the term because they used it first, then the rules of the game say that they need to file an opposition and obtain their own trademark. I suspect that, deep down, the real problem is that they want exclusive use but having their project "own" a trademark requires that there be some persistent legal entity to do the owning, and unless the university is willing to act in that role, it takes a certain amount of hassle and money to create and maintain such an entity. Most universities do hold trademarks (particularly on their name) so it may just be a matter of the money.

      Note that different projects seem to take different attitudes towards this. While there are a number of trademarks on the term "PERL", including one for canned meat, none of them appear to cover a computer language. The term "VISUAL PERL" for an environment for writing programs is registered. One suspects that anyone filing an application for a "PERL" trademark, other than Larry himself, would have problems. OTOH, the term "PYTHON" for a programming language appears to be registered.

  17. What took them so long? by brundlefly · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I have no dispute with the university's prior claim.

    But I have to wonder if they have been living under a rock... what took them so long to get vocal about this? RH's Fedora has been on the public radar for a long, long time now.

    1. Re:What took them so long? by techstar25 · · Score: 1

      RedHat filed for the trademark two months ago. September 5, 2003 to be exact.

    2. Re:What took them so long? by payette · · Score: 2

      We have not been under a rock. On the contrary, we have tried to take a diplomatic approach with Red Hat through a series of informal and formal calls, emails, and letters to express our concerns. Since Red Hat has not changed it's position, we decided to make the open source community aware of our views on the matter.

  18. Firebird! by silicongodcom · · Score: 5, Funny

    Just call it Firebird!

    1. Re:Firebird! by pebs · · Score: 1

      Just call it Firebird!

      Or how about Firehat? Oh wait, nope.

      --
      #!/
    2. Re:Firebird! by j3110 · · Score: 1

      Why don't people just use a different language when they run into common names like firebird... It could be:
      Ignisaves (who speaks latin?)
      Purornis (no one could dispute what it means in Greek anyhow)

      The software is named after the hat, that is named after an Italian Opera, Fedora, that gets it's name from the princess in the story, Princess Fedora Romazov.

      It's a stupid name to begin with, just like "Red Hat". Besides, RedHat is more identified as a welcome mat for hackers than a Linux distrobution with all their insecure hacks on generally secure software packages (including the kernel). Which is probably why they are trying to get away from the RedHat branding of Linux anyhow. I always believed the hat was red because trying to keep the system secure would likely cause cerebral hemorrhaging.

      --
      Karma Clown
    3. Re:Firebird! by jfeasel · · Score: 1

      How about FreeHat?

    4. Re:Firebird! by ssstraub · · Score: 1

      Why would they name if after database software?

  19. Trademarks... by badasscat · · Score: 2, Insightful

    IANAL, but AFAIK you cannot trademark common English words. The example I've always seen is that you cannot trademark the word "orange", but you could trademark a unique phrase containing the word "orange". The Fedora Project homepage linked from the parent article seems to have the *word* "Fedora" trademarked, which I can't see would be possible (and in fact, it's not listed as a registered trademark, just a trademark - so there's no government sanctioning of their trademark).

    I'm not sure I blame Red Hat for this one. A fedora is a fedora, just like an orange is an orange. You can't trademark it. If two companies are using the same word for their software projects, too bad. Protest those who put the word in the Oxford dictionary, maybe... but I don't think there's any real legal claim here.

    And I'll close by reminding you again, IANAL.

    1. Re:Trademarks... by javatips · · Score: 4, Informative

      You can trademark common english words if the product/service the trademark will be put on is not related to the meaning of the word.

      I can trademark "Truck" for some software product but not for a vehicule.

    2. Re:Trademarks... by j-turkey · · Score: 1
      IANAL, but AFAIK you cannot trademark common English words.

      IANAL either -- but if you can trademark Red Hat, Yahoo!, Fox, etc -- or the name of any company/product that's an English word or phrase, how does Fedora not apply?

      What the law (AFAIK) comes down to is really to protect your name, which differtiates your product or company from competitors. I can't go start another TV Network called Fox. Similarly, I can't open a courier services and offer "UPS Brown" service. These are protected names...trademarks. In this case, trademark law comes into place big-time. Especially if there's a documented prior art bearing the same name. RH will have a hard time trademarking a software package named Fedora.

      --Turkey
      --

      -Turkey

    3. Re:Trademarks... by jesterzog · · Score: 1

      I can't comment about the US with any authority, but it sounds like it's similar to New Zealand (where I am).

      Here, you can't prevent people from using common words but you can still trademark them as trade names. This was in the local news several years ago when someone managed to trademark the word "Millenium".

      It didn't mean that nobody could use the word Millenium. It didn't even mean that people couldn't use it for routine commercial use. (eg. "There will be a huge sale to mark the new millenium.") What it did mean is that nobody else could create a product or whatever called "Millenium".

    4. Re:Trademarks... by tmark · · Score: 1

      There are TONS of trademarks issued for words that are in the English language. Look at Apple, Sun, and Windows for examples. Hell, even 'Ford' is an English word.

    5. Re:Trademarks... by Beautyon · · Score: 1

      It, like IANAL is an Acronym.

      "Flexible Extensible Digital Object Repository Architecture" = FEDORA.

      Decapped, it becomes "Fedora".

      And there you have it, "Fedora" is trademarkable.

      Trademarkable is not an English language word.

      --
      ATH0 Bitcoin: 1DnwFLXczVZV8kLJbMYoheUrpqHesjxrSi
    6. Re:Trademarks... by Experiment+626 · · Score: 1

      AFAIK you cannot trademark common English words. The example I've always seen is that you cannot trademark the word "orange", but you could trademark a unique phrase containing the word "orange".

      IANAL either, but I believe that the way trademarks work (in the U.S. anyway) is that you can trademark common words, within the context of a particular domain. For example, within the context of computers, only a certain company can call their products "Apple" (a common English word), but now that that company is also getting into the music business, they've come into legal conflict with the company that has the rights to the word over in that industry.

      Limiting the trademark to a particular domain like this leads to many unrelated companies sharing the same common word, which usually works out okay as long as they are in separate businesses... there might be an airline, a pizza place, and a lawn care service that all use the same common word for their name, but this is unlikely to create any confusion on the part of the customers. There might be a little resentment over who gets the .com name, but that's a different topic.

      Broader protection applies to companies that make up a word out of the blue instead of using a common one. For instance, it would be unwise to call your new business "Exxon" even if it has nothing to do with petroleum, because that's a word unique to a particular company. You might on the other hand be able to use the word "Shell".

      As a side note, for common words to be used in a trademark, the use of the word within that domain should be unique. "Apple" pretty much had no meaning in the context of computers before that company took the name, so any reference to "Apple" within the field of computers presumably refers to their trademark. On the other hand, "Windows" was a common term within computing for a type of GUI element, already had meaning within that domain, and never should have been granted as a trademark to the Microsoft Corportation.

    7. Re:Trademarks... by vocaro · · Score: 1
      IANAL, but AFAIK you cannot trademark common English words.

      Hmm... How about these:

      • word
      • mail
      • outlook
      • office
      • access
      • works
      • windows
      All are common English words; all are trademarked. Now, you could say that "Windows" is not actually a trademark, and that "Microsoft Windows" is what is trademarked. But it seems quite clear from this document that "Windows" by itself is a trademark and will be defended as such.

      A fedora is a fedora, just like an orange is an orange. You can't trademark it.

      This is not true. There is no requirement that trademarks cannot be common words; they only have to be sufficiently distinctive from products in the same industry. For example, I could legally trademark my new TV dinner as "Windows", but I could not call my new operating system "Windows". It is unlikely anyone would confuse the Windows OS with a Windows meal, but if I were to sell an OS called "Windows", then Microsoft could claim that their advertising dollars were helping my business (their competitor), which is clearly unfair.

      Because the Fedora Project from Red Hat and the Fedora Project from the Virginia/Cornell are both open-source software projects, I think there is a high likelihood of confusion and that Virginia/Cornell certainly has a case.

    8. Re:Trademarks... by rossz · · Score: 1

      Yes, you can trademark common english words, but it can not describe what you do or sell. Thus you have Apple Computers and Apple Records, but no fruit company called Apple - though you could possibly use "Pacific Apple Company". Another example, you couldn't call your internet company "ISP" since it is an industry term, but you could call your fruit company that.

      IANAL.

      --
      -- Will program for bandwidth
    9. Re:Trademarks... by mrtroy · · Score: 1

      Previous art:

      The Millenium falcon

      er.......

      :)

      --
      [I can picture a world without war, without hate. I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it]
    10. Re:Trademarks... by Paul87 · · Score: 1

      IANAL, but AFAIK you cannot trademark common English words. The example I've always seen is that you cannot trademark the word "orange", but you could trademark a unique phrase containing the word "orange".

      Er...Orange

    11. Re:Trademarks... by tigga · · Score: 1
      Hence, Windows(tm)

      No, it's MS Windows(tm)

    12. Re:Trademarks... by dubiousmike · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but I trademarked the word "truck" when specifically used in message board posting.

      I will need an immediate retraction. I suggest you use the phrase "almost van" in its place.

      Thank you.

    13. Re:Trademarks... by Beautyon · · Score: 1

      The trademark office doenst care if the chicken or the egg came first, which is the point.

      --
      ATH0 Bitcoin: 1DnwFLXczVZV8kLJbMYoheUrpqHesjxrSi
    14. Re:Trademarks... by tigga · · Score: 1
      But it seems quite clear from this document that "Windows" by itself is a trademark and will be defended as such.

      Yes - from USPTO
      Word Mark WINDOWS
      Goods and Services IC 042. US 100 101. G & S: HEALTHCARE SERVICES FOR PATIENTS AFFLICTED WITH DEMENTIA. FIRST USE: 20020121. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20020121

      Word Mark WINDOWS
      Goods and Services IC 003. US 001 004 006 050 051 052. G & S: body care products, namely, skin moisturizer, lotion, creams, oils, powders and soaps all for the hands and body; bath oils, bath gels, and sun care products, namely, a sunscreen and sunblock. FIRST USE: 19990211. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19990211 IC 018. US 001 002 003 022 041. G & S: luggage, namely, tote bags. FIRST USE: 19990211. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19990211

      And of course bazillion 'windows' by Microsoft in different areas...

    15. Re:Trademarks... by Spl0it · · Score: 1

      I do see a problem, the next thing you know all large corporations new projects will take on the name(s) of new small companies names/projects that are trying to compete with the giants.

      How would you feel if you spent 2 years developing ProductX123 and then Microsoft released the a new product in DIRECT compition with yours called ProductX123, when you have allready been using the name for over a year prior but because of your small reach and small advertising budget they blow you away and when people here ProductX123 they don't even know there's another project/product called that.

      --

      No, this is
    16. Re:Trademarks... by JeffTL · · Score: 1

      No, actually, it's an apronym. A backronym is created ex post facto by a third party; an apronym is a legitimate acronym designed to produce a certain abbreviation.

    17. Re:Trademarks... by Pentagram · · Score: 1

      Why would anyone want to create another product called 'Millenium'? Millennium on the other hand...

    18. Re:Trademarks... by jonadab · · Score: 1

      > The example I've always seen is that you cannot trademark the word "orange"

      There is a qualitative difference in frequency of use between "orange" and
      "fedora". "orange" is a third-tier word (first-tier words being the three
      articles and one or two coordinating conjunctions, and second-tier words
      being ones it's hard to write a chapter without using, such as "this" and
      "see"). "hat" is probably fourth-tier (someone studying English as a foreign
      language might get weeks into the course before learning it; "orange" is a
      first-week word almost for sure), and "fedora" a good-sized step beyond that.

      Trademarking "orange" in pretty much any industry is fairly unreasonable.
      "hat" would be borderline; you surely couldn't get away with it in any industry
      related in even the most tangential way to clothing or other accessories, but
      you conceivably might be able to trademark "Hat" as a brand of gasoline or
      software, perhaps. Maybe. (Red Hat, of course, combines two words, and so
      is more defensible than merely "Hat" would be, to say nothing of "Red" by
      itself, which obviously wouldn't fly.)

      "fedora" you couldn't trademark as a brand of hat, and probably not as a line
      of clothing or personal accessory either, but in an unrelated field such as
      cuisine (*that* could make an interesting ad campaign) or software it's almost
      certainly a fairly trademarkeable word, with the obvious limitation that you
      can't take over the word entirely for uses outside the industry in question
      (i.e., Red Hat can certainly not go after people selling hats with the word
      fedora on the label, and they'd be on pretty shaky ground going after someone
      selling cuisine or toothpaste, but software is another matter).

      All of this sidesteps the question of *which* entity has the right to use
      the "Fedora" trademark in the realm of software. It looks as if the
      universities have reason to believe they have a case, but I don't have
      enough solid and verifiable information to know for certain.

      For the record, I have a lot more sympathy for this Fedora project than for
      the Firebird DB people, on the grounds that "Fedora" is a much less common
      trademark than "Firebird". "Firebird" has been used, used again, used to
      death, and then used some more in roughly every single industry known to man,
      often by several companies in the same industry. Except *maybe* in the
      automobile industry, I seriously doubt that any company can make a trademark
      on the word "Firebird" stick. (Though, if there's a word that's been used
      *more* often as a product name in *more* industries, Phoenix is it.) OTOH,
      "Fedora" seems unusual enough to be defensible, for a software product.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
  20. New name by Bazman · · Score: 1, Funny

    Since all the geeks round here refer to 'Head Rat Linux' anyway, they should rename it Deaf Aura just to keep one step ahead...

  21. New Fedora Name Poll by gekkotron · · Score: 5, Funny

    1. Bowler
    2. Beanie
    3. Tinfoil
    4. Fez
    5. Toque
    6. Skullcap
    7. Helmet
    8. Cowboy Neal's AssHat

    1. Re:New Fedora Name Poll by HoldmyCauls · · Score: 1

      Tinfoil Linux already taken ;)

      --
      Emacs: for people who just never know when to :q!
    2. Re:New Fedora Name Poll by jonnyfivealive · · Score: 1

      "helmet" linux sounds pretty secure to me...

      otoh, number 8 is appealing...

    3. Re:New Fedora Name Poll by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Number 7 is almost correct. It needs to be prefaced with the term DARK.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    4. Re:New Fedora Name Poll by Blue+Stone · · Score: 1
      Helmet sounds good.

      Red Hat.
      Purple Helmet.

      Problem solved!

      --
      Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
    5. Re:New Fedora Name Poll by GreyWolf3000 · · Score: 1

      If RedHat gave you trouble, it's because no one was qualified enough to admin the boxes.

      --
      Slashdot: Where people pretend to be twice as smart as they really are by behaving like children.
    6. Re:New Fedora Name Poll by JPelorat · · Score: 1

      That was Dragonlance (which was not originally part of AD&D), but yeah, it could have been an attempt at defining neutrality. Interesting.

      --
      Hokey statistics and ancient misconceptions are no match for a good thought in your head, kid!
    7. Re:New Fedora Name Poll by frostfreek · · Score: 1

      Personally, I think it should be 'FRedora'

    8. Re:New Fedora Name Poll by Thavius · · Score: 1

      AssHat Linux, isn't that what SCO's linux product would be called?

    9. Re:New Fedora Name Poll by giantsfan89 · · Score: 1

      9. 10-gallon Linux

      :)

      --
      Don't ping my cheese with your bandwidth!
    10. Re:New Fedora Name Poll by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      Purple Foreskin

    11. Re:New Fedora Name Poll by tigga · · Score: 1
      I'll go with AssHat

      Perhaps Red Ass Hat?

  22. Trademarking common words by love2hateMS · · Score: 1

    Maybe we just need to stop letting people trademark common words. To me it is ridiculous that anyone can trademark a word that is found in a dictionary.

    I'm going to trademark the word "the".

    1. Re:Trademarking common words by BJH · · Score: 1

      The(TM) Linux... hmmm, works for me.

    2. Re:Trademarking common words by saddino · · Score: 1

      Maybe we just need to stop letting people trademark common words. To me it is ridiculous that anyone can trademark a word that is found in a dictionary.

      To me it is ridiculous that you would even suggest this. Can you imagine having to remember made up names for every product in the world?

      Xevutsy Toothpaste
      Cryunhoot Coffee

      Please. Using a common word as a trademark is fine -- it only stops direct competitors (in your market segment) from using the same word in their product or service. This insures that consumers aren't confused and that you (as the trademark holder) don't have to worry about harm to the goodwill you've built around your product/service name.

      People seem to be confused that a trademark stops all common or public usage of that word (witness all the other "I'm going to trademark the word 'the' and sue all you guys" comments around here). That just isn't so folks!

      So let's not get all worked up over trademarks -- it's a good thing.(TM)

    3. Re:Trademarking common words by Atomizer · · Score: 1

      You might run into problems with The The.

  23. Re:Maybe Just Qualify the Name by RLW · · Score: 2, Funny

    Awsome name. Then RPM's should be called mini-carts.
    Who wouldn't want that ?

  24. Re:Does by pebs · · Score: 1
    Ok, I feel like an idiot now:
    fedora \fe*do"ra\ (f[i^]*d[^o]r"[.a]), n.
    A soft felt hat with a crown creased lengthwise.
    Syn: felt hat, homburg, Stetson, trilby.
    --
    #!/
  25. I always thought it looked more like by cryptogryphon · · Score: 1
  26. Fedora(TM) -- okay we get the point! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    I don't know much about the dispute but the use of trademarks on fedora.info's page is a tad bit on the excessive side. Being in advertising I have to use trademarks all the time, the general rule is you only apply it to the first instance. The exception being when it's used again in a headline, header or subhead.

  27. A Rose By Any Other Name by Eberlin · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Well, can't use "Pink Tie" if I recall correctly, as that's what cheapbytes used to sell what would have otherwise been a Red Hat distro.

    How about calling it "The Distro Formerly Known as Red Hat Linux for Consumers?" -- or "|" for short? Instant recognition from avid *nix users...yet geeky enough to separate the "in-crowd" from the strictly-windows folks.

    The ironic thing about this is that Fedora is supposed to be the community edition of Red Hat Linux (so the PR wants us to imagine as opposed to bluntly being beta testers of RHE) -- it really isn't good press to be creating negative buzz in the community.

    That said, I'm running a downloaded version of RH9 and wondering how things will go from there.

  28. USPTO Link by Gunfighter · · Score: 5, Informative

    Click here to view the status of Red Hat's Trademark filing.

    --
    -- Stu

    /. ID under 2,000. I feel old now.
    1. Re:USPTO Link by belloc · · Score: 1

      From that page: Redhat's patent lawyer's name is "Mark H. Webbink". I guess Samuel G. Internetman wasn't able to take the case?

      Belloc

      --
      I got more rhymes than Jamaica got Mangoes.
  29. Not clear when they started griping by Spinality · · Score: 2, Informative

    They may have just gone public, but their site says "The Cornell and Virginia teams have taken a number of steps to try to work with Red Hat regarding use of the name Fedora(TM). At this date, Red Hat has refused our request...." My guess is that they started waving their hands as soon as it became public knowledge, but as usual it took a while for everybody to hear about everybody else -- by which time it's a little late to get the toothpaste back into the tube.

    --
    -- We all have enough strength to endure the misfortunes of other people. La Rochefoucauld
    1. Re:Not clear when they started griping by Ophidian+P.+Jones · · Score: 1

      That reminds me, I'm out of toothpaste. Better stop at Walgreens on the way home!

  30. No, I think its more of .. by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 1

    a homburg

    --
    Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
  31. Butthead Astronomer by eddy · · Score: 1

    Just change the name to "Butthead University".

    --
    Belief is the currency of delusion.
    1. Re:Butthead Astronomer by jonnyfivealive · · Score: 1

      or CGNU!!!

      go dumples

  32. Fedora = Bad Name by msimm · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Fedora is a horrible name. Why waste time and money protecting it? It isn't catchy, it doesn't sound sexy enough to sell to a desktop user and it doesn't sound serious enough for business.

    Its a joke and not a very clever one. They had there laugh, now is a good time to move on to more important things.

    --
    Quack, quack.
    1. Re:Fedora = Bad Name by Slime-dogg · · Score: 1

      It's all relative.

      I never think of software as "sexy," yet many geeks out there do. If you want a sexy name, they should go with something like "long legs linux," "tits and thighs linux," "supple navel linux," "hourglass linux," etc.

      I think Fedora is suitable enough, it's about as recognizable a word as Gentoo or Mandrake.

      --
      You need to restart your computer. Hold down the Power button for several seconds or press the Restart button.
    2. Re:Fedora = Bad Name by bogie · · Score: 1

      First off they are not actually selling to the desktop user since its free. Second, its not really meant for business use, so there goes your second point. Lastly everyone who has ever even heard of Linux knows about RedHat. Thus when they come across Fedora the first thought that comes to mind is that this is a RedHat product. That in itself is going to determine whether they try the product, not the actual name of the product.

      Just because you personally think its bad name doesn't really matter much in the end now does it? I could go on and on about how dumb names like Suse, Debian, Gentoo, Mandrake, and Slackware sound at first, but what's the freaking point? A name is a name is a name. Judge the product on how useful it is, not because you have some sort of bias against certain words.

      --
      If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
    3. Re:Fedora = Bad Name by eric76 · · Score: 1

      If there was a Big Tit Linux, it might gain popularity real quick.

  33. How about Phoenix? by el-spectre · · Score: 2, Funny

    Just a thought...

    --
    "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
    1. Re:How about Phoenix? by freeze128 · · Score: 1

      How about HatZilla?

    2. Re:How about Phoenix? by jonadab · · Score: 1

      If I were to compile a list of the top ten most overused trademarks, words used
      more times for more products and services in more industries than could possibly
      be considered reasonable, Phoenix would be probably second on the list, after
      "Zip". "Zip", of course, is the ultimate indefensible trademark, having been
      used dozens of times in the software industry alone, for everything from
      virtual machines to compression and archival to modem software. Of course
      it's also been used for cleaning products, shoes, food and drink, ... I
      honestly believe "The" is at least as defensible a trademark at this point as
      "Zip" (assuming you only try to protect "The" used as the product name, not
      every use of the word in product descriptions). Phoenix is not far behind.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    3. Re:How about Phoenix? by el-spectre · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it does seem to keep rising from the dead...

      --
      "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
  34. Re:Maybe Just Qualify the Name by sik0fewl · · Score: 1

    How about. . . Redora?

    Ok. I've got nothing.

    --
    I remember when legal used to mean lawful, now it means some kind of loophole. - Leo Kessler
  35. Cowboy Linux! by moronikos · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The ought to name it after the cowboy hat, our President (in the U.S.), and after Cowboy Neal!

  36. Re:Some other hat.. by I+don't+want+to+spen · · Score: 1

    ... and I was going to suggest that they Beret the hatchet ...!

    --
    Don't go to a brothel if you want to buy broth
  37. Isn't WINDOWS a common word? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Windows, Ford, and other are common words. I too, am not a lawyer, but it seems like there's no problem if there's no confusion. The point is to bust people who are piggybacking on someone else's success or giving your product a bad name. These two products could reasonably be confused. Therefore it would be advisable to choose a different name.

  38. No by corebreech · · Score: 1

    No, if you read the press release you will see that they were releasing software and documentation as far back as 1998. The May 2003 date is simply when they reached version 1.0.

  39. indy? by hyperstation · · Score: 1

    am i the only one that associates "fedora" with indiana jones?

  40. SCO (or Microsoft) can learn from RedHat by Triumph+The+Insult+C · · Score: 1

    to squash your competition, simply get a short, 2 line story posted to slashdot. let geeks around the world do the dirty work for you for free. no more stock options for lawyers!

    --
    vodka, straight up, thank you!
  41. Re:Maybe Just Qualify the Name by himself · · Score: 1

    >
    > Or they could call it Fez.
    >
    Wouldn't the network who produced (and still syndicates) "That Seventies Show" sue? They've been known to be a little trigger-happy in the past -- just ask Al Franken.

  42. farting around... by kevin+lyda · · Score: 1

    according to these folks they farted around for 5 years and did barely anything. redhat announces a merger with the existing fedora linux project (existing since november 2002) and there's a release in just a month or so. and while redhat has trademarked the name they haven't threatened this project.

    and now they want to bitch about the name?

    --
    US Citizen living abroad? Register to vote!
    1. Re:farting around... by ragnar · · Score: 1

      Actually, the people at Fedora are simply stating that they are concerned about the implications of RedHat trademarking the name. I believe they raise some good points. Rather than engaging in dialogue, RedHat simply went on a track to claim ownership on the name.

      As for the "farted around for 5 years" statement, I don't think you have enough appreciation for the scope of the project. Digital library initiatives are pushing a very big rock uphill. When a library has 300 year old books surviving on the shelf they look at any technology with appropriate skepticism. Anything they adopt is expected to endure, so it is an extensive process.

      I don't mean any disrespect to the fedora linux project, but they aren't trying to build something that can outlive our grandchildren.

      --
      -- Solaris Central - http://w
  43. Re:Maybe Just Qualify the Name by lone_marauder · · Score: 1

    Or they could call it Fez

    Well, my initial thought was that it should be called "Propeller Beanie", but given the short and unhappy history of Fedora Linux thus far, I think "Crash Helmet" is probably more appropriate.

    --
    who are those slashdot people? they swept over like Mongol-Tartars.
  44. fedora.info lies by oldstrat · · Score: 5, Informative


    A search at the US patent and trademark office lists 4 registered trademarks with the word fedora in them.

    . 73467748 Feb 28 1984 Fedora Cafe and Bar
    . 78296509 Sept 5 2003 Red Hat
    . 78268874 June 30 2003 cosmetics
    . 78312293 Oct 10 2003 Chemical Data Software

    The fedora.info site of the complaining fedora project is using a tm symbol next to thier name on the site, but they have not registered it with the US trademark office.

    It is not exclusively trademarked for software by fedora.info.
    This could be forgiven of a small independent group, but this group is a co sponsored project, part of Cornell University and University of Virginia both of which I am sure have strict policies about things like Trademark, copyright and patents. And both have the legal staff to handle it.

    Sorry but they won't get any sympathy from me, and no support from the law.

    Trademark is not like copyright law, you must register to get exclusive control for a product in a market.

    1. Re:fedora.info lies by RedHat+Rocky · · Score: 1

      The project's complaint would seem to be that Red Hat has made a clear statement that Red Hat will vigorously defend ALL of their trademarks. The discussion would then seem to be self defense on the project's part: "Hey, we have been using that for 5 years, are you going to leave us alone? Hello? Bueller?"

      Red Hat is stuck, they can't let one trademark infringement slide if they intend to keep the trademark pure. I agree with a previous poster, Red Hat deserves a kick in the pants for not doing a simple google on Fedora!

      --
      Anything is possible given time and money.
    2. Re:fedora.info lies by wytcld · · Score: 1

      Trademark is not like copyright law, you must register to get exclusive control for a product in a market.

      Um, bull. IANAL but I worked for a year as a legal assistant specializing in trademarks. Trademark is established under common law by use of the mark. A trademark filing is just an assertion that the mark is already in use by you - you can't even file before it's actually being used in connection with the sale of goods or services. Filing the trademark is purely a convenience, a way of establishing further evidence of your common law right.

      It's like a common law marriage (which I know less about). The common law marriage exists whether or not you have a marriage certificate; but if you're able to get a marriage certificate for it that certificate may be convenient in certain circumstances. In either case, however, the reality exists under common law, and not as matter dependent on the certification.

      --
      "with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
    3. Re:fedora.info lies by GammaTau · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The fedora.info site of the complaining fedora project is using a tm symbol next to thier name on the site, but they have not registered it with the US trademark office.

      As far as I know, there are basically two ways of getting a trademark: the first is by registering and the second is by using something commercially long enough for it to become clearly associated with a company or a product. The first kind of trademark is denoted by having an R inside a circle whereas the second is denoted with the small tm symbol.

      In other words:
      (R) = Trademark through registration
      tm = Trademark through established use

      Using the tm symbol in the press release is consistent with their position because they're saying that they have become associated with the name 'Fedora'. They can have a trademark claim to the word even when they haven't registered it.

      Disclaimer: IANAL etc.

    4. Re:fedora.info lies by Crispy+Critters · · Score: 1
      "you can't even file before it's actually being used in connection with the sale of goods or services."

      Is the collaboration between Cornell University and University of Virginia engaging in trade? I don't see any evidence of it. If they aren't selling it, it isn't trade. If there is no trade, there is no trademark, from what I have read. If they had burned a few CDs and sold them, it would be completely different.

      Whether Red Hat can stop them from using the Fedora name, I don't know. This may be a relatively untested issue. Before the web, there were not many ways a named project could gain an international audience without engaging in trade.

    5. Re:fedora.info lies by joggle · · Score: 1
      There's really no problem here. If you can prove you were using the name before they received their trade mark, you're not in trouble (although, I believe, you can't force the trade mark owner to relinquish the trade mark, unless you have tons of bucks and can prove that it was a common word at the time of the trade mark application).

      For instance, there was a restaurant in Colorado that had "Vail" as part of its name. A year or so ago, the company that owns the Vail ski resort tried to force the restaurant to change its name. However, since the restaurant had been in business for about 40 years (a couple of years longer than the resort itself), the name remained the same, although I think it went to court before it was all over.

    6. Re:fedora.info lies by RogerWilco · · Score: 1

      thank you I always wondered what the difference was.

      --
      RogerWilco the Adventurous Janitor
    7. Re:fedora.info lies by oldstrat · · Score: 1


      exclusive control

      I guess you didn't read the line fully.

      They can continue to use it due to prior use, but they cannot claim control.

      Ever hear of Snyder's of Hanover?
      The reason for the 'of Hanover' is that another company trademarked Snyder's and also sold potato chips.

      There is no common law trademark, there is only common use sales mark lowercase sm.

    8. Re:fedora.info lies by joggle · · Score: 1

      Well, as I said it went to court. If they hadn't been able to defend themselves, I'm sure the outcome would have been different. Probably the guy that owned the MacDonald's Cafe didn't have the resources for a possibly extended court battle.

    9. Re:fedora.info lies by horati0 · · Score: 1

      In other words:
      (R) = Trademark through registration
      tm = Trademark through established use


      That's easy enough to follow, but what exactly constitutes "established use"? Established by who? After how much time? Seems like an arbitrary distinction.

      --
      The neutrality of this sig is disputed.
    10. Re:fedora.info lies by Alan+Cox · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If you look at archive.org wayback machine you will also find that until after the trademark filing by Red Hat they were called "F.E.D.O.R.A." - without a tm, which is an acronym not a trademark.

      Makes you wonder which computer companies sponsor their research

    11. Re:fedora.info lies by RedWizzard · · Score: 1
      Using the tm symbol in the press release is consistent with their position because they're saying that they have become associated with the name 'Fedora'. They can have a trademark claim to the word even when they haven't registered it.
      True, however they only started using the tm symbol after RedHat did. Ultimately a court will need to decide. In the meantime the USPTO is unlikely to reject RedHat's application.
    12. Re:fedora.info lies by bovinewasteproduct · · Score: 1

      The fedora.info site of the complaining fedora project is using a tm symbol next to thier name on the site, but they have not registered it with the US trademark office.

      The [tm] symbol is for claimed trademarks. Now if they had a [R] (read that as a R in a circle) symbol, then it would be REGISTERED trademark. Big differences...:)

      BWP

  45. Re:Why the mess? by inteller · · Score: 1

    yeah I don't know why geeks are so obsessed with fedoras anyways....its a lame attempt to make yourself look cool. and they look nothing like the fedora Indiana Jones wore.

  46. Re:Fedora = Stench by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    You got that right. "Fedor" in Portuguese means stench. The "-a" ending is feminine, so "fedora" sounds like, well, you can imagine.

    What the heck were they thinking???

  47. Re:This brings up an important point. by jrduncans · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The university isn't making a trademark claim. Redhat is, which is going to prevent them from using a name that they've been using for quite some time. The Fedora Info project appears to be ok with Redhat using the name "Fedora", but they're not ok with Redhat trademarking it, as that would interfere with their continued use of the name Fedora. All clear?

  48. Re:Maybe Just Qualify the Name by T-Ranger · · Score: 2, Informative

    The name of the (F)orgin (E)xchange (S)tudent on "That Secenties Show" is FES. Or rather, thats his nickname; his real name has never been disclosed.

  49. Re:Hats with corks by BJH · · Score: 1

    That's called a "swagman's hat".

    Hmmm... Swagman Linux... not bad. Unfortunately, the name 'Swagman' seems to be already taken.

  50. ROFLMAO.. by msimm · · Score: 1

    Thanks, I didn't know that. *tears* :-)

    --
    Quack, quack.
  51. Sad Sad World! by Prince+Vegeta+SSJ4 · · Score: 1

    I just did a search for 'heavens to murgatroid', because I couldn't remember which of my old cartoon favorites used that line. And guess what I find This, WTF ?!?!?!?

    1. Re:Sad Sad World! by AKAImBatman · · Score: 1

      Snagglepuss IIRC. His other favorite line was "Exiiittt, Stage Left evvveeenn!" :-)

    2. Re:Sad Sad World! by Prince+Vegeta+SSJ4 · · Score: 1
      Sorry, forgot the link.

      I just did a search for 'heavens to murgatroid', because I couldn't remember which of my old cartoon favorites used that line. And guess what I find This, WTF ?!?!?!?

    3. Re:Sad Sad World! by IWorkForMorons · · Score: 1

      If it makes you feel better, the cartoon was called "Captain N"...

    4. Re:Sad Sad World! by Dr.+Smeegee · · Score: 1

      I think the Funky (Funky Fantom / Phunky Phantom) Phantom also used that as a tag line. (I beleive that he and snag were both done by Daws Butler... (clickety clickety) Yep.

  52. Re:Trademarks... (and Microsoft) by mcrbids · · Score: 1

    You can trademark common english words if the product/service the trademark will be put on is not related to the meaning of the word.

    All true and correct. But this doesn't explain how "Windows" really justifies its trademark. A "window" in computer parlance means what we all think it is - a program in a box on a screen. Thus, "X-Windows". How can it be claimed that a "Window" (and thus "Windows") is not a generic term?

    Watching the Lindows trademark suit may be *very* interesting, if Lindows goes on the offensive and has the resources to pull it off...

    --
    I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
  53. Fedora IS a hat by macdaddy · · Score: 4, Informative
    Fedora is a type of hat.

    fedora ( P ) Pronunciation Key (f-dor, -dr)
    n.

    A soft felt hat with a fairly low crown creased lengthwise and a brim that can be turned up or down.

    That's probably why Cornell's Fedora Project uses a hat as a logo and why Redhat chose Fedora as a project name.

    1. Re:Fedora IS a hat by cnkeller · · Score: 1
      That's probably why Cornell's Fedora Project uses a hat as a logo and why Redhat chose Fedora as a project name.

      I've been paying less attention to linux over the past few months since I've moved on to OS X, but I believe that RedHat didn't exactly choose the Fedora name. Warren had been using fedora for his apt-rpm repository for a while and when RedHat merged their desktop distro with his stuff, they simply kept the name. It doesn't really change anything, but I'm not really familiar with trademark law.

      --

      there are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots

    2. Re:Fedora IS a hat by macdaddy · · Score: 1

      Beats me. IANAL but I drool over the hot ADA's on Law and Order. ;-)

    3. Re:Fedora IS a hat by sco08y · · Score: 1

      Grammar Disclaimer: Read what I meant, not what I wrote.

      That should be a "Semantic Disclaimer" as bad grammar doesn't affect meaning.

  54. Re:Maybe Just Qualify the Name by pyros · · Score: 1
    Then RPM's should be called mini-carts.

    I don't get it. I get [Red] Fez, but what do mini-carts have to do with those Arabic/Mediterranean hats?

  55. All your fedoras are belong to us by FractiousWeasel · · Score: 1

    Who'd be surprised if SCO tried to enforce their patent on dyed felt?

  56. Sort this out like gentlemen please... by tiger99 · · Score: 1

    One hopes that the parties concerned will behave like gentlemen and sort this out between themselves without setting their lawyers on each other, thus proving that the world of open source can behave in a civilised manner, unlike Mr. McBride. There is much to gain from a fair and just settlement being achieved quickly. It seems to me that if pushed to the limit, Red Hat will need to back down, but not knowing all the details, that may not be so. It may even be that the names can exist simultaneously as they refer to quite different products, eg if one company made a Fedora car, and another created a Fedora breakfact cereal, there would not normally be a conflict. Now as one product is an application, and the other a complete OS suite, they are fairly different things. It might not be unreasonable for them to settle by calling one Fedora Repository, and the other Fedora Linux, for example. It would also be decent if each put a link to the other on their web site and a mention on their package or hardcopy manual. That would be in the spirit of what open source is all about, and would be to the mutual benefit of both parties. But, if it descends to the lower regions of civilisation where lawyers lurk to releive everyone of their hard-earned cash, the image of open source is damaged, and we are on a level with Gates, Ballmer, McBride etc. Please do not let this happen. To prevent future problems, maybe someone like the FSF, in conjunction with other relevant parties encompassing other variants of open or free software, could coordinate the naming of future projects, so there would be no need for conflicts to happen in the future. By avoiding conflict and any kind of heavy-handed approach, there is much to be gained for everyone. While the chief proponents of closed-source bugware waste their time and energy suing each other, the open source movement should be producing useful applications.

  57. Re:Who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    I've used Fedora on my home system and I thik it's pretty slick. It's definately a step up from RedHat 8 or 9. Did you read a review on slashddot to base your opinion? Try it for yourself, then decide. Doesn't Fedora allow you to roll out your own up2date repository, so as long as you can build your own RPMs and put them in there, you could have all your desktops update to the same software without having to rely on RedHat's very short product life cycle to keep support for your OS. Basically Fedora makes it more Your OS then RedHat ever did. This is especially attractive to the network admins who are running many linux desktops and want to roll out their own packages. I got to say that I love it.

  58. Wait, Taco! by Call+Me+Black+Cloud · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Before you send off those interview questions to Matthew Szulik, I think there may be one or two new ones that would be appropriate...

  59. Re:Maybe Just Qualify the Name by pyros · · Score: 1

    ah, I always called them mini-cars. I like the Twain quote.

  60. Re:Some other hat.. by mikewolf · · Score: 1

    what about RedCap Linux??

  61. come on, look at the logo.... by dAzED1 · · Score: 1

    I can't believe what some of you are writing...

    Does no one notice the "red hat" is a red fedora? HELLO? The choice of name was not arbitrary. No, they could not have just called themselves "pink sunglasses."

    I dislike Fedora as much as the next guy (meaning the distro) but geeze...

    Take a look here. Scroll down, and there you'll see...wait, what is that...its a Fedora! Its red! Its the same damn hat that's been in the RH logo for years (not the original, mind you, but for a lot longer than 1998 anyway).

    Regardless, if the fedora.info project has it trademarked, then they do. But it was NOT an arbitrary choice, people. yeesh.

    1. Re:come on, look at the logo.... by jliverse · · Score: 1

      Okay, this is a dupe, but... Red Hat is using a damn chapeau. The Cornell/UVA group is using an actual Fedora(TM). FYI: Company founder Marc Ewing was given the Cornell lacrosse team cap (with red and white stripes) while at college by his grandfather. Not a Fedora(TM), mind you. IANAHE.

  62. Re:Does by Carnildo · · Score: 1

    I find it interesting that they're using a black hat.

    --
    "They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
  63. What Was Red Hat Thinking? by BlackBolt · · Score: 1

    The REAL question I'm wondering is: Did Red Hat seriously not take five minutes to look into any prior instances of the name "Fedora" in similar projects (any search engine would turn this up), or did Red Hat decide they were big and powerful enough that they could pretend they were Microsoft or Apple and just throw their legal and financial weight around and simply steal the name from the "little guy"?

    1. Re:What Was Red Hat Thinking? by lobotomy · · Score: 1
      What were you thinking when you posted this? Did you not take five minutes to look up the Fedora Project?

      Seriously, the Fedora Project was started in December 2002. Quoted from their original site (http://www.fedora.us/):

      Founded December 2002 by University of Hawaii Computer Science student Warren Togami, the previous Fedora Linux Project is an international team of volunteer software developers united for the development of high quality 3rd party RPM packages for the Red Hat Linux platform.
  64. Re:Maybe Just Qualify the Name by kryptobiotic · · Score: 1

    It is a reference to the Shriners who often appear in parades driving little go-karts and wearing red fezzes.

  65. USPTO status by Animats · · Score: 1
    The current trademark status of "Fedora" is that Red Hat has applied for US trademark registration, but their application hasn't even been reviewed yet. Red Hat has only filed an "intent to use" the trademark; the date "first use in commerce" is "unavailable".

    The Fedora Project can now also apply for trademark registration, with a "first use in commerce" date several years old. If they do, the examiner will have to sort this out. The Fedora Project probably has priority, which is based on the date of first use in commerce.

    1. Re:USPTO status by btgarner · · Score: 1

      The University project should file for TM status as well. After the Red Hat TM application is reviewed, it is published for "public comment" -- at that time the University project should point out (if not beforehand) that the name in question has been in use for 5+ years in the same area, thus superceding the RedHat claim.

    2. Re:USPTO status by Animats · · Score: 1
      Actually, you get (TM) status by usage. You get (R) status by registering with the PTO.

      Also, you can register trademarks online in a few minutes. If you have a good domain name, register it.

  66. Possible Alternatives For Redhat To Consider by H8X55 · · Score: 1

    The Other Fedora
    Kids Edition: Dora the Fedora
    Fedora 2: Bride of Fedora
    RedFoam (an anagram of Fedora M)
    Dope Hat
    Dick Head (Detectives in the 40's wore fedoras and were called "Dicks" and Hats are worn on the head)
    Red Hat could get a celebrity endorser, and attach his name to the product. Maybe a celebrity Red Hat user, or wearer.
    Pete Rose's Red Hat Fedora
    Alvin's Red Hat Fedora (of Alvin and the Chipmunks fame).
    or a rock band
    Limp Bizkit's Fred Durst's Red Hat Fedora (known for his backwards Red baseball cap).
    What about Redora

    1. Re:Possible Alternatives For Redhat To Consider by mrscorpio · · Score: 2, Funny

      I suggested this a long time ago - Head Rat Linux.

      Chris

  67. Re:Maybe Just Qualify the Name by pyros · · Score: 1

    on his first episode, when he said 'his name' while the bell was ringing, he actually said the real names of the other actors. Think I saw that on one of Fox's blooper shows.

  68. RedMond Hat Linux? by jav1231 · · Score: 1

    Kinda reminds you of the Nissan Computer vs. Nissan Motors battle.
    Remember some years ago when some of the more fanatical in the OS community worried RH would become the M$ of Linux? I recall thinking these folks were crazy but now I'm thinking they just might be clairvoyant!

    1. Re:RedMond Hat Linux? by grolschie · · Score: 1

      > RedMond Hat Linux?

      Sorry, that's been trademarked by SCO already.

  69. Before you name a project, USE GOOGLE!!! by G4from128k · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm always shocked at these types of naming farces. It is so easy to run a search on any name and determine prior uses. Besides a search engine, other good sources of prior uses of name include any online yellow pages, whois, and the USPTO Trademark Search. A bit of searching before deciding on a name can help prevent these types of trademark infringement problems.

    --
    Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
    1. Re:Before you name a project, USE GOOGLE!!! by krbvroc1 · · Score: 1

      It is so easy to run a search on any name and determine prior uses.

      I found that no matter which word I type, I get a hit from google. Not sure that is realistic plan. ;)

      I use roboform which can generate random passwords - how about using those for names?

      Introducing the Hk7jI8Po distribution.

  70. Why is this a big deal? by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

    In the Cornell/UVA Link, they consistently brand Fedora with the "TM" symbol, indicating that the "Fedora" name is indeed trademarked.

    So, just call up the US Patent and TRADEMARK Office and see who it belongs to.

    Does anyone know if Trademarks are subject to the same Prior Art challenges as Patents are?

    1. Re:Why is this a big deal? by jliverse · · Score: 1

      The (TM) denotes a trademark established through common usage, as opposed to (R), which is a Registered trademark. Redhat is trying to take the Cornell/UVA (TM) and (R) it.

  71. But about as interesting by msimm · · Score: 1

    as shovel or paperweight. Red Hat as a name was interesting. Fedora is more like a developer name and signifies about as much. Kind of like saying "nothing to see here".

    --
    Quack, quack.
  72. Trademarking version numbers by solprovider · · Score: 1

    Apple got away with using "OS 9" despite the existence of an earlier "OS-9" on the grounds that no one could confuse an embedded product with a desktop OS.

    I do not know how the law affects this, but it seems silly that version numbers can be trademarked. Why did Apple need to justify that version 9 of their OS can be called "OS9"? That would be like trademarking "OS2". Wait, IBM already did that.

    IBM decided to avoid these issues with Lotus Notes. Everybody abbreviated "Lotus Notes Release 4" to "R4". Everybody abbreviated "Lotus Notes Release 5" to "R5". Most people abbreviate "Lotus Notes Release 6" to "R6", but IBM has requested that everybody refer to it as "D6" (Domino release 6) and "N6" (Notes release 6) to avoid difficulties with SAP, which already used "R6". If a company with the legal prowess of IBM thinks it is important to make an effort to convince the users how to talk about their product, there must be major legal difficulties that they are trying to avoid. I do not understand, since their trademarks are "Lotus" and "Notes", not the version numbers, although I think they did trademark the image of R5 with a hula hoop.

    I always figured that MS changed their versioning for Windows so people would not ask "You need windows 4 what?" with the usual answer of "Because my computer is running too fast and I cannot catch it." If they can skip MSWord5, they can skip MSWindows4 through 94, although it was more impressive when they skipped 99 through 1999. (Yeah, I know they were different product lines.)

    I should find a new word for versioning my software. "Variant" and "Volume" are still "V". "Rendition" is still "R". "Make" is "M", which might work if it does not upset the entire Unix and OSS worlds. "Publication" is too long and would allow "pee" jokes. "Issue" is the best word I found. Now I need the software trademarks for "I2", "I3", "I4", "I5"... so I do not have to worry about conflicts with the abbreviated forms.

    --
    I spend my life entertaining my brain.
    1. Re:Trademarking version numbers by Otter · · Score: 1
      Obviously, there's no issue with straight version numbers -- Solaris 9 and Mandrake 9.0 aren't being accused of infringement.

      Apple was marketing their operating system as "OS 9" (like they do today with "OS X" which is going to outlive the end of version 10), and I'm not sure if OS-9 even represented a version number. It represented infringement in the eyes of the plaintiff, if not to the court. I imagine the issue with Lotus Notes you refer to is similar.

    2. Re:Trademarking version numbers by operagost · · Score: 1

      The name of the product is "OS/2". The use of the slash, plus two letters probably makes it trademarkable.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    3. Re:Trademarking version numbers by jmauro · · Score: 1

      OS 9 is the name of the operating system, similar to Windows, Linux, or BeOS. 9 does not refer to the version which is why it could be trademarked. As a result, Apple was prevented from calling their version 9 as OS 9 to avoid confusion. As a result the OS is always refered to as MacOS 9.

    4. Re:Trademarking version numbers by dryeo · · Score: 1
      I always figured that MS changed their versioning for Windows so people would not ask "You need windows 4 what?" with the usual answer of "Because my computer is running too fast and I cannot catch it."

      Actually they changed the version numbers because they had licensed Windows up to ver 4 to IBM. By skipping ver 4 they didn't have to supply source to IBM. Even internally Win95 was version 4.095. Gotta love how MS honours their agreements
      Dave

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
  73. This is like the Firebird database hijacking by HiThere · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    The Firebird DBMS has been running for years before the Mozilla group decided to claim the name. The only difference is that they didn't fight back...possibly because they couldn't afford the lawyers. This one may go to the courts...and I won't be on Red Hat's side.

    As to what I think of Mozilla for claim jumping the Firebird name... I think it a was gross, disreputable, and dishonorable act, and that any group that intentionally committed it is laying claim to those characteristics. (I know that they HAD to change names because they were threatened by Phoenix...but that's no real excuse for what they did. Phoenix was a very different product compared to Firebird. Firebird just couldn't threaten them with lawyers.)

    --

    I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    1. Re:This is like the Firebird database hijacking by MrJones · · Score: 1

      I agree, it looka like a lot to the Mozilla Firebird name issue.
      I don't like the that the word "redhat" is not used the RedHat project called Fedora.

      --
      Get my e-mail after a captcha test in: http://tinymailt
    2. Re:This is like the Firebird database hijacking by Haeleth · · Score: 1

      As to what I think of Mozilla for claim jumping the Firebird name... I think it a was gross, disreputable, and dishonorable act, and that any group that intentionally committed it is laying claim to those characteristics.

      Er, I think you're mistaken. The web browser is called "Mozilla Firebird", not just Firebird. I have been unable to find a single reference in any publication by the Mozilla group to any product called "Firebird". How can Mozilla have "claim jumped" the name "Firebird", when that is not what their product is called?

    3. Re:This is like the Firebird database hijacking by nzkoz · · Score: 1

      On top of that, Firebird is only the working name. After 1.0 it will be Mozilla Browser.

      --
      Cheers Koz
    4. Re:This is like the Firebird database hijacking by jejones · · Score: 1

      The Firebird DBMS has been running for years before the Mozilla group decided to claim the name. The only difference is that they didn't fight back...

      Yes, they did; they encouraged people to flood Mozilla with email to generate publicity, under the "there's no such thing as bad publicity" theory. (I wonder whether they're pleased with the results.)

  74. Mark your calendars. by Raven42rac · · Score: 1

    Today I claim the word "The" to be my idea. Anyone who even thinks about making something called "The", or who even uses that word, will be sued by me and my lawyers for one-hundred trillion dollars. Wait a minute, looking at my post, I may need to sue myself, Fox style.

    --
    I hate sigs.
  75. How about "Crimson Fedora"? by Black+Perl · · Score: 1

    Looks like Red Hat needs to find another name.

    They should call it "Crimson Fedora" and be done with it. It leaves no doubt it's associated with Red Hat.

    --
    bp
  76. Correct your facts by xcomputer_man · · Score: 1

    Excuse me sir, I'd like to have some of what you're smoking.

    The Fedora Project was started in 1999; by September 2001, a significant framework was already in place -- significant enough to warrant a $1 million grant for a "sophisticated digital object repository system" based on Fedora. The May 2003 date was for the public version 1.0 release, and has nothing to do with the inception of the project. Fedora Linux was not started until December 2002. When you consider that the Fedora name was also already trademarked by the university, you can see why they have a strong point.

    1. Re:Correct your facts by schon · · Score: 1

      When you consider that the Fedora name was also already trademarked by the university, you can see why they have a strong point.

      Actually, if you check the wayback machine (as Alan Cox pointed out), you'll find that they didn't 'trademark' the name (by putting the 'tm' after it) until after Redhat did.

      So, it appears that you should perhaps not ask for 'whatever it is they're smoking', because it could clash with whatever it is that you're smoking.

  77. Re:Who cares? by geoffspear · · Score: 1

    Apparently you didn't read the comment to which he was replying, which was evaluating the redhat Fedora project. Get a clue yourself.

    --
    Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
  78. How about Blue Bonnet? by MrPink2U · · Score: 1

    "Like butter!"

    Thank you, I'll be here all week!

  79. RedHat is not exactly going MS on us by psyberjedi · · Score: 1

    They are simply continuing a trend of sue them before they sue us. Not saying that Fedora "The College Project" was necessarily going to sue RedHat, but it happens. Small group with a claim sues larger/richer group just for some cash. It is not rare nor unrealistic of this kind of lawsuit. The fact is that anyone looking at Fedora Linux is not going to be confused by a Digital Repository or vice versa, so all we are asking for is a little reality check and reasonabilty by both sides. I agree however, that "Fedora" is not the greatest name in the world, so does anyone really want to die on THAT mountain.

    --
    He who confuses his religion with his science knows neither.
  80. Re:Who cares? by Spl0it · · Score: 1

    Its offtopic, theres no justification for it. Not everyone has time to read 600comments per article, unless its informative,funny,etc.. then its not on my list. If someone else posts an Offtopic thread, replying Offtopic is still OFFTOPIC lol!

    --

    No, this is
  81. Re:Why the mess? by NineNine · · Score: 1

    Hey kid... in a lame attempt to make a cool post, you missed the origin of the fedora by about 80 years. The Fedora was huge in the 1920's, and brought back again by Frank Sinatra into popular culture.

  82. Re:Who cares? by geoffspear · · Score: 1

    Well then your reply is also offtopic, and it's rather inconsiderate to not post as AC and force someone to waste mod points modding you down to the level you think your comment deserves to be at.

    --
    Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
  83. Perfect name change! by IntelliTubbie · · Score: 1

    Why don't they just call it "Debian"? As in, "Ever since Red Hat disowned the community distribution, I've been using Debian." I've heard people using it this way already, so it shouldn't be too hard to change. Just start using "Debian" instead of "Fedora".

    Cheers,
    IT

    --

    Power corrupts. PowerPoint corrupts absolutely.

  84. I'm suing Sun by vgaphil · · Score: 1

    I created a buggy POS Java app last year named JavaSwitch. I tried to compile it with the latest version of Java the other day and it crapped out because there is now a built-in class called JavaSwitch. I'm going to sue Sun, McBride-style. =) Good times.

    Zend all Sig.

    --
    A clever person solves a problem. A wise person avoids it. -- Einstein
  85. Re:Who cares? by Spl0it · · Score: 1

    Very true!

    --

    No, this is
  86. How did this get modded up? Read the site! by emkman · · Score: 1

    Virginia/Cornell have been using the name Fedora since 1998. I don't think Warren Togami has anything to take exception to. Both of them should just share and get along. Fedora is a regular noun, a type of hat. Its not a made up word someone can take claim to.

    --
    Moderation Totals: Flamebait=2, Troll=1, Redundant=1, Insightful=6, Overrated=1, Underrated=1, Total=12. (not mine)
  87. All the good names are taken by Kombat · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The problem is that all the best names are already taken. Some are taken by real companies selling real products, others are taken by obscure one-man-shop programmers. RedHat wanted a cool name for this new product, and realized they'd have better odds picking a fight with a ragtag bunch of students than with a real company with real resources to invest in a legal battle.

    I think they're right. Seriously, all the best names are taken. If you're going to create a new product, the best you can hope for is that whoever has already created a product with that name didn't really do much with it, and will be willing to sell you the name (or not put up a fight when you take it anyway).

    --
    Like woodworking? Build your own picture frames.
    1. Re:All the good names are taken by d34thm0nk3y · · Score: 1

      consider this: how many words that could be used as names are there in the english language?

      how many companies have there ever been (do trademarks remain if the company goes bankrupt or is sold?)?

      there is going to have to be some overlap eventually...

    2. Re:All the good names are taken by G4from128k · · Score: 1

      The problem is that all the best names are already taken.

      So true! The problem with hoping that you won't face a C&D or trademark infringement lawsuit is that such lawsuits are not too pleasant and tend to distract customers and investors. That's why we get companies named LoudCloud, Accenture, and Agilent -- 100% unique, made-up names that the creators hope provide a cool and meaningful brand image.

      --
      Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
    3. Re:All the good names are taken by jejones · · Score: 1

      True. Maybe it's time for Castle Anthrax Linux?

    4. Re:All the good names are taken by eric76 · · Score: 1
      The problem is that all the best names are already taken.

      Yeah. It's probably too late for a Jolly Green Giant Linux distribution.

      Considering some of the more or less common interests of many geeks, why don't we have something like Elvish Linux? I'd bet a Linux distribution named Elvish Linux would be remembered more easily by far more geeks.

      On the other hand, some of the non-geeks might think it is some new kind of cookie.

    5. Re:All the good names are taken by monkeyfinger · · Score: 1
      there is going to have to be some overlap eventually...

      Yeah, but we could make those words go a lot further by using 1337 speak.

      F3d0r@ linux anyone?

  88. Why not use my name? by Bowie+J.+Poag · · Score: 2, Funny



    Being strong, reliable, and slightly bloated myself, I feel my name would be a wonderful alternative to "Fedora".

    Just thinking ahead. ;)

    (By the way, stop sucking, Red Hat. Seriously.)

    --
    Bowie J. Poag

  89. Tired of it. by XFriday · · Score: 1

    Aren't you guys sick of shit like this? How hard is it to say "No, we're the *other* Fedora project." Every friggin day you hear about something like this..

    Intellectual Properly rights.
    Patent-this.
    Copyright-that.
    Darl McBride.
    RIAA.
    MPAA.
    DMCA.

    Like FUCK - when will this insanity end. Everyone gets so bloody bothered about *everything* these days. If you were to send one day's worth of CNN or Slashdot back to someone in the 70's, they'd look at it sideways and say "What the fuck are these people on?" And the scary thing is that it is getting worse.

    This post is (C)opyright XFriday. All Rights Reserved. Patent Pending. Unauthorized reproduction is prohibited. Reading the above material constitutes acceptances of my end user license agreement, which you can see if you sign an NDA. I do not tolerate intellectual property infringements and I WILL sue you if you violate any of the terms I have mentioned, and some of the ones I have not mentioned. Fuck off, and have a nice day.

  90. Sounds like Inboxcop v spybot by mikeswi · · Score: 1

    Some idiot tried to trademark the word "Spybot", bought up spybot.com, then tried to strong arm the guy that makes Spybot S&D antispyware. We announced a boycott of the company involved, had a bunch of web sites pull ads, thousands of angry emails/letters were sent to the people involved, etc.

    They tried to feed me a line of crap and tried to fool me into backing off. So I turned the heat up a little hotter with a new announcement and the guy gave it up the next day.

    Those guys were not the sharpest sporks in the box, believe me.

  91. Why not give up by Kelz · · Score: 1

    and just use "sombrero"? Might go over really well with the latin customers.

  92. Fedora prior art? by Quixadhal · · Score: 3, Funny

    Indiana Jones is reportedly suing Red Hat, Inc. for casting his trademark headgear in a bad light. Doctor Jones's lawyer says that the term "Red Hat" could also be subject to trademark, as one of Indy's seldom worn spring outfits featured a red fedora.

    In other news, Darl McBride was seen running amuck in the downtown area, stealing any hats he could get his hands on while screaming 'They're ALL MINE! MINE!!!'

    1. Re:Fedora prior art? by revery · · Score: 1

      ROFL... If I had been drinking coffee when I read this. I would be dead right now. Thanks for the laugh :)

      --

      Was it the sheep climbing onto the altar, or the cattle lowing to be slain,
      or the Son of God hanging dead and bloodied on a cross that told me this was a world condemned, but loved and bought with blood.

  93. Re:fedora.info ctd by Alan+Cox · · Score: 1

    Uggh, didn't realise slashdot would strip the tags around the joke part

  94. Re:Why the mess? by inteller · · Score: 1

    so a "cutting edge" OS wishes to associate itself with 80 year old apparel? ok whatever.

  95. Amen by ishmalius · · Score: 1

    I absolutely agree. Although this is a tempest in a teacup, RedHat could have been responsible enough to spend 15 seconds to Google for the word.

  96. ::cough:: Used the standard C library recently? by smcv · · Score: 1

    Gnome users might be using GNU/Linux, but KDE users sure aren't.

    Really?

    $ ldd /usr/bin/konqueror | grep libc
    libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0x0e89c000)
    $ ldd /usr/lib/libkdecore.so.4 | grep libc
    libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0x6fa17000)
    $ dpkg -S /lib/libc.so.6
    libc6: /lib/libc.so.6
    $ head -2 /usr/share/doc/libc6/copyright
    This is the Debian prepackaged version of the GNU C Library version
    2.3.x

    Without glibc, my Debian box certainly wouldn't be much of an OS - practically none of the programs would work. The major components of a Unix system are a kernel and a C library - Linux is only one of those.

    Incidentally, if you think you can use XFree86 and KDE on Linux without needing command-line tools, I suggest you have a look at the scripts your system uses to boot, particularly the line "#!/bin/sh" at the top. Just because you don't use them yourself doesn't mean they're not necessary.

    (On the other hand, I've seen one Linux distribution which can reasonably claim to not be GNU/Linux - revol, which runs on Psion Revo electronic organisers with 16M of RAM and no disks or removable media. It doesn't use GNU tools and libraries because they're too big; if I remember correctly it uses dietlibc for the C library and busybox for the shell utilities.)

    1. Re:::cough:: Used the standard C library recently? by aardvarkjoe · · Score: 1

      The major components of a Unix system are a kernel and a C library - Linux is only one of those.

      Yes, if you define "Operating System" in such a way as to artificially give GNU software extra representation, of course you can "prove" that a Linux system is completely dependent on GNU.

      Of course, most of the rest of us realize that the term "operating system" includes hundreds of programs from different sources, and find it ridiculous that RMS thinks we should single out and pay tribute to his own project because of some vacuous claim of indispensibility.

      --

      How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
    2. Re:::cough:: Used the standard C library recently? by smcv · · Score: 1

      hundreds of programs from different sources ... almost all of which need a Unix C runtime library ("libc").

      If you have access to a Debian machine (or something else which uses dpkg), try this:

      dpkg --simulate --remove libc6

      (you might need /sbin and /usr/sbin in your PATH; if you don't use something Debianish, I'm sure other package management systems like RPM have an equivalent incantation)

      This will tell you what would happen if you removed libc6; on my computer, it complains about broken dependencies for around 750 packages, including Konqueror, KOffice, OpenOffice, Mozilla, XFree86, Apache, Perl and Python to name but a few. That's not including things which depend on libc indirectly (for instance, Perl modules which need Perl).

      Anyway, you'll observe that hundreds of programs from different sources depend on having a C library, and won't be much use without one. In the case of Debian (and every other major Linux distribution I'm aware of), the default C library is glibc 2.x, also known as libc6.

      (If your distribution statically links some executables, they won't actually need a C library at runtime, but only because they have the necessary bits embedded in them at compile time - it's likely that they'll have been compiled against glibc too, and therefore will contain parts of glibc.)

      It's entirely possible to put together a distribution of Linux which uses a different implementation of libc as its C library (as I mentioned, revol is such a system - if I remember correctly, it uses dietlibc), but few distributors do.

      It's also possible to put together a distribution of Linux with no libc at all, but it wouldn't be an implementation of Unix, and if you wanted to actually achieve anything with it, you'd have to reimplement a lot of the basics yourself.

    3. Re:::cough:: Used the standard C library recently? by aardvarkjoe · · Score: 1

      So removing libc breaks the OS. So what? That doesn't make it any more important than any of the other programs that I rely on.

      --

      How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
  97. I can't think of any... by lostchicken · · Score: 2, Interesting

    When have trademark cases actually been won by the big guys? When has a major company had to rename a product, after it had shipped? I'm sure there are examples, but I can't think of any.

    --
    -twb
  98. RedHat by greymond · · Score: 1

    fedora (P)Pronunciation Key(f-dor, -dr)
    n.

    A soft felt hat with a fairly low crown creased lengthwise and a brim that can be turned up or down.

    Could be a red hat too me :)

  99. microsoft linux by werdnapk · · Score: 1

    Go microsoft linux! Fight the man!

  100. Whats in a name? by starnix · · Score: 1

    Anyone wanna argue with me over the use of "Festerin g Bunghole" LINUX? Probably not. Maybe we should use THAT name.

  101. why not.... by hypermegachi · · Score: 1

    why didn't they just name it bluehat?

  102. Thats just how we've been trying to justify.. by msimm · · Score: 1

    all of our other marketing short comings in the OSS community. Your right, there are those who care about adoption and those who don't. I thought Red Hat did.

    --
    Quack, quack.
  103. Another name for Consideration by duck_prime · · Score: 1

    Hey ...

    How about Chapeau-S/2 ?

  104. Bad Publicity by superpulpsicle · · Score: 1

    Man, if redhat can't even get step 1 right they shouldn't even be in business anymore.

    This is what happens when you don't have expert coders and developers volunteer and do things for you. Now the managment team is taking over the whole pie and it's already a disaster.

  105. odd by rawshark · · Score: 1

    This is quite odd, as I remember several months ago when Red Hat Linux became Fedora the site http://fedora.redhat.com had a note saying "We thank Cornell University and the University of Virginia for their cooperation in letting us use the Fedora name"

    I cannot find that page now. Does anyone have an archive.org link?

  106. No: "TM" means Trade-Marked, (R) means Registered by schmaltz · · Score: 1

    As in, registered with USPTO. One need not file paperwork to use ^TM next to a tradename. Being registered would entitle you to use of circle-R, which is NOT what fedora.info has claimed.

    They do have a position that has legal and case-law support. Probably this will be played out in court. With this case, it is even money who wins, but I'm favoring the universities.

    Just my opinion, IANAL etc.

    --
    Big Daddy, Johnny, Burp, Aunt Zelda, Scott, Slurp, Big Momma ... where's Siggy?
  107. There shouldn't be a problem here. by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 1

    1) Fedora isn't anything they're pitching to customers. So it doesn't need to compete in the marketplace, so there's no reason why they need to make sure the name isn't confusing. (No one would mistake "Fedora" RHL for any other product bearing it's name... it's an OPERATING SYSTEM for crying out loud)

    2) FEDORA is an academic project, and it's called "Fedora PROJECT", no just Fedora.
    The people who know what Fedora is in that sense would be directly interested in the project, and could not possibly connect it to RedHat.

    You won't accidentally stumble onto the Fedora PROJECT and attempt to install it over Windows.
    Not happening. :-)
    I really don't see how anyone can object to either party using the name other than just being pricks.

    --
    THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
  108. Er, the University project is the newer one by Nailer · · Score: 1

    Just in case you missed the comment earlier, Fedora.us (which merged with Red Hat Linux Project to create Fedora) has been around longer than the University project.

  109. Re:Maybe Just Qualify the Name by downundarob · · Score: 1


    Just like that..... just like that...

  110. Ah-ha! by Kommet · · Score: 1
    That explains why those words were neon red, underlined, blinking, and 3 sizes larget than the rest of Slashdot's comment text is.

    I've hacked Firebird (Browser. The DB people can go spit.) to recognise <ObStupidConspiracyTheory> tags and then set up a custom stylesheet to make the text between them REALLY stand out. I decided I need to know right away whenever those tags are used so I can be certain to believe the whole section as rapidly as possible after loading the page.

    Funny thing, though, is this is the first time I've seen it triggered...

    Gotta go, 'cause my foil hat is slipping and I think the squirrels are watching me. Keep up the good work, though, Brother Cox.

  111. 9. DeadHat by metamatic · · Score: 1

    10. RedHate

    --
    GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
  112. Re:Some other hat.. by bovinewasteproduct · · Score: 1

    what about RedCap Linux??

    It depends...

    If you want the distro to associated with bloodthirsty fairies, please go right on ahead.:)

  113. well.. by Suppafly · · Score: 1

    Since one is an OS and the other is An Open-Source Digital Repository Management System .. I don't really see the conflict.

  114. AWESOME! by batquux · · Score: 1

    If RedHat has to change the name of their project, my copy of Fedora will be worth more!

  115. Fedora project existed before it was Fedora Linux by Ed+Avis · · Score: 1

    So which came first: the Cornell project, or the Fedora project at the University of Hawaii? If Cornell's project was first, why haven't they complained about the name clash until now?

    --
    -- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
  116. It's not hard to create a unique name (generators) by dwheeler · · Score: 1
    Yes, most of the names in the English dictionary are taken by someone or other. English doesn't have that many words, and there are a lot of projects and companies.

    However, it's easy to create a unique name. One way is to use a random name generator. I give away Totro, a free GPL'ed name generator. You don't even have to install anything, just view the page and start creating names. Yes, the resulting name won't be a name in the dictionary, but that's a good thing - that means that the name is much more likely to be unique.

    --
    - David A. Wheeler (see my Secure Programming HOWTO)
  117. You might be a little misleading... by marcello_dl · · Score: 1

    Yes, the resulting name won't be a name in the dictionary...

    Ap'ka
    Kaj
    Soc
    Owkuci
    Skes
    Ravi
    Aefreoreo
    Stink Bestrau
    Uprit
    Sciwkiv
    Mig
    Eaglu
    Oeni
    Pefug
    Uphu
    Fugrok
    Fek
    Auta
    Leliow

    I guess it doesn't check against a dictionary :)

    --
    ---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
  118. Re:Trademarks... (and Microsoft) by One+Louder · · Score: 1

    Actually, Microsoft *has* trademarked the single word "Windows", as well as the combination "Microsoft Windows". That's what the Lindows trademark suit is all about.

  119. Re:Why the mess? by NineNine · · Score: 1

    so a "cutting edge" OS wishes to associate itself with 80 year old apparel? ok whatever.


    Actually, fedoras *are* pretty cool. But then, *nix users wouldn't know cool if it sat on their face and wiggled.

  120. Found a statement from Red Hat (unofficial) by Kelson · · Score: 1

    A recent post on the fedora-legacy mailing list makes the following points (emphasis added):

    [Michael Johnson] talked with the legal counsel at red hat and got the following info.

    - the fedora.info people haven't tried to take a number of steps to work it out - they've taken none
    - fedora.info was only using f.e.d.o.r.a as an acronym -not as a trademark
    - only after the rh trademark filing did fedora.info assert a trademark
    - rh had previously informed uva and cornell that rh would not interfere with their continued use of the fedora trademark.
    - the fedora has been associated with red hat ever since the shadowman logo was adopted.

    Add this to the fact that fedora.redhat.com used to include a statement thanking Cornell and UVA for cooperating in the new name choice (it's gone now), and it sounds to me like F.E.D.O.R.A. just got ticked off that people were asking Fedora Core questions on their mailing lists.
  121. Re:Trademarks... (and Microsoft) by bellings · · Score: 1

    There letter X has been trademarked about 50 times. One of the trademarks is on the X (tm) Window System.

    Windows has also been trademarked by several companies. One of the trademarks is on the Windows (tm) Operating System.

    There may also be some sort of "X-Windows" trademark, though I don't know what sort of product it's on. I keep reading about it on slashdot, so I suppose it may exist. People on slashdot are generally supersmart.

    --
    Slashdot is jumping the shark. I'm just driving the boat.
  122. Re:No: "TM" means Trade-Marked, (R) means Register by oldstrat · · Score: 1



    They only have a case to use the trademark for thier project, nothing else.
    The same as Software Etc. and Software Etcetera in the Philly area back in the late Eighties.

    My point was the project (neither) can claim exclusive use.

    The University project is requesting
    'At this date, Red Hat has refused our request to withdraw its trademark applications and reverse its claims of usage restrictions on the name.'.

    The request is assinine, if it were as important as they make out then they have no excuse for not having registered it themselves.